HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_07 24 2003sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
JULY 24, 2003
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being eleven (11) in number.
II. Members Present: Obray Nunnley, Jr.
Judith Faust
Bob Lowry
Robert Stebbins
Norm Floyd
Mizan Rahman
Bill Rector
Rohn Muse
Fred Allen, Jr.
Gary Langlais
Jerry Meyer
Members Absent: None
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the June 12, 2003 Meeting of the
Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were
approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
JULY 24, 2003
4:00 P.M.
I. DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Callaghan Creek Preliminary Plat (S-1385), located north of Raines Road
east of the Sullivan Road intersection.
B. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-01-03) in the River Mountain
Planning District, located south of County Farm Road near the intersection
with River Valley Marina Road, a change from Single Family and
Park/Open Space to Commercial.
B.1. River Harbor Long-form PCD (Z-7412), located on County Farm Road
east of River Valley Marina Road.
C. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-11-03) from Single-family to Office
for an area north of West 20th Street and west of Wilson Road.
D. A rezoning from R-2 to O-1 (Z-7399), located on the northwest corner of
Wilson Street and West 20th Street.
E. Sipe Ministries Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit (Z-4849-A),
located at 8619, 8705, 8707 Stanton Road.
II. NEW ITEMS:
1. Hunters Green Estates Revised PRD (Z-4587-C), located at #91 Hunters
Green Circle.
2. Williams Short-form PCD (Z-5944-A), located at 3221 John Barrow Road.
3. Enoch’s School of Beauty Revised Short-form PCD (Z-6446-A), located
at 14116 Taylor Loop Road.
4. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-18-02) from Single-family to
Suburban Office for the 18400 Block of Kanis Road.
4.1 ESG Short-form POD (Z-7008-A), located at 18425 Kanis Road.
5. Huston Electric Company Short-form PD-C (Z-7432), located at
1904 West 3rd Street.
Agenda, Page Two
II. NEW ITEMS:
6. Malmstorm Short-form POD (Z-7433), located on the northwest corner of
Kanis Road and Autumn Road.
7. Lot 12 of the Village at Rahling Road Revised Long-form PCD (Z-6323-G),
located on Rahling Circle (Unrecorded Lot 12).
8. Splash Car Wash on Bowman Road (Z-7434), located on South Bowman
Road approximately 850 feet south of Kanis Road.
9. Splash Car Wash on Kanis Road (Z-7435), located at 15823 Kanis Road.
10. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-01-04) a change from Transition to
Commercial for the 14400 Block of Cantrell Road.
10.1 Lusk Long-form PCD (Z-7436), located at 14410 Cantrell Road.
11. Broadmoor Shopping Center Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-6-D), located
on the northwest corner of Lakeshore Drive and South University Avenue.
12. Dogwood Crossing – The Ranch Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-285-CCC),
located on the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and South Katillus Road.
13. Southwest City Commercial Lot B-R-5 Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-434-
M), located southeast of the I-30 Frontage Road and the Geyer Spring Road
intersection.
14. The Villages at Wellington Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1042-AA), located at
Wellington Plantation Drive and Wellington Plantation Court.
15. Pinnacle Ridge Estates Preliminary Plat (S-1392), located 300-feet north of
Old Arkansas Drive and Barrett Road.
16. Otter Creek Plaza Preliminary Plat (S-1393), located on the northeast corner
of Otter Creek Parkway and Stagecoach Road.
17. Carter Oaks Addition Preliminary Plat (S-1394), located on the west side of
Carter Lane ½ mile south of Taylor Loop Road.
18. Pleasant Ridge North Office Building Short-form POD Time Extension
(Z-1716-E), located at 11400 Cantrell Road.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: S-1385
NAME: Callaghan Creek Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: North of Raines Road near the intersection with Sullivan Road
DEVELOPER:
M. Mellor Incorporated
10001 Mabelvale Pike
Mabelvale, AR 72103
ENGINEER:
The Mehlburger Firm
201 South Izard Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 38.8 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 22 FT. NEW STREET: 1850
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 17 – Crystal Valley
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A five (5) year deferral of Master Street Plan requirements to Raines Road (1/2
street construction requirement).
2. A waiver of Master Street Plan requirements for the internal streets (to maintain
internal streets as private streets).
3. A waiver of Master Street Plan requirements for the internal sidewalk placement and
to allow walking trails as an alternative pedestrian circulation system.
4. A variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 38 acre tract into 22 one-acre home
site, walking trails around a five acre lake and twelve acres of woodlands in a
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
2
private gated community. The development is requesting a waiver of Master
Street Plan requirements to allow the subdivision to develop with private streets
and walking trails as an alternative pedestrian circulation system.
The development is proposed as a fenced, private gated community with under
ground utilities and a private wastewater collection and treatment facility. The
applicant is proposing a Step System in which each unit will have a septic tank
where the solids are contained and the liquids are drained through lines to be
collected into a second holding tank to be treated and later be discharged into
the Callaghan Creek. (The site is located outside the city limits therefore
connection to the Little Rock Wastewater Utility system is not an option without
annexation.)
There are four waivers and variances being requested as a part of the
development. The applicant is requesting a waiver of Master Street Plan
requirements to Raines Road. The applicant is also requesting a waiver of the
Master Street Plan requirements for the internal streets. As stated the streets will
be maintained as private streets and will be constructed to City standard with the
exception of sidewalks. The applicant has indicted the desired effect is that of a
rural setting.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow three of the 22 lots to develop at a
greater lot depth to width ratio than is allowed under the Subdivision Ordinance
and a variance to allow lots to development without public street frontage (private
streets will serve the development).
The City’s Master Street Plan also indicates a Collector street located on the
applicant’s western property line. Staff has reviewed the Master Street Plan and
has determined due to the development pattern in the area a Collector in not
needed in this location. Staff is requesting the Commission review the
abandonment of the Collector street from the Master Street Plan as apart of this
application.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant; tree covered and gently sloping from the west and north to the
east and south. The area is primarily single family in both stick built and
manufactured homes. The area to the south is a non-conforming non-residential
uses at one time used as a salvage yard.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Southwest United for Progress, the Crystal Valley Neighborhood Association and
the Otter Creek Homeowners Association along with all abutting property owners
were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, staff has not received any
comment from area residents.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Raines Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required.
2. There is an un-named collector street shown on the Master Street Plan that
runs along the western boundary of the proposed subdivision. A dedication of
right-of-way 30-feet from the property boundary will be required.
3. Provide design of boundary streets conforming to the Master Street Plan.
Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
4. A sidewalk is required on one side of Lake Lucca Road to the intersection of
Lake Luccea Court.
5. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
6. Alteration of the water course will require approval from the Little Rock District
of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start of work.
7. The proposed alteration of the floodway will require flood map revisions.
Obtain conditional approval from Pulaski County and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency prior to start of construction.
8. This typical section does not meet Master Street Plan cross section
requirements. The typical residential section is 26-feet wide from back of
curb to back of curb.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside service boundary, no comment.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Installation of water facilities will be required in order to
provide adequate fire protection and water service to this property. All Central
Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service
must be met. This development will have minor impact on existing water
distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for
additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
4
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 22, 2003)
Mr. Mike Watson of the Mehlburger Firm was present representing the
application. Staff briefly described the proposal indicating the site was located
outside the city limits but in the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. Staff
stated the applicant was proposing the placement of a private wastewater
collection and treatment facility on the site. Staff requested the applicant provide
additional information concerning the wastewater collection and treatment facility.
Staff stated there were a number of waivers and variances being requested for
the proposed development. Staff stated the applicant was requesting waivers for
Master Street Plan requirements and lot development standards. There was a
discussion concerning the proposed Collector street located on the western
property line to extend from Raines Road north to eventually connect with
Sullivan Road. There was also a discussion concerning the ordinance
requirements with regard to setbacks related to a collector street. Mr. Watson
stated with the development pattern in the area a Collector street was no longer
necessary. He stated the area to the west had developed with a cul-de-sac and
the rear of the homes would abut the street. He stated even if his owner
developed one-half of the street the other one-half would not be developed.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated right-of-way would be
required along Raines Road. Staff stated the Master Street Plan did require one-
half street improvements to the road and the waiver would have to be sought
from the Commission and ultimately the Board of Directors. Staff also stated per
the Master Street Plan a sidewalk was required along Lake Lucca Road to the
intersection of Lake Luccea Court.
Mr. Watson stated he would meet with his client and discuss the comments. Me
stated he would return a revised plan to staff by the requested date. There were
no additional comments for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item
to the full Commission for final action.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the May 22, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has requested
a five (5) year deferral of half street construction to Raines Road. Staff is
supportive of this request.
The applicant has also requested a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to
allow Lots 12, 13 and 20 to develop with an increased depth to width ratio. The
Subdivision Ordinance states no lot maybe developed at a depth greater than
three times the width [Section 31-232(b)]. Staff is supportive of the request to
allow an increased depth to width ratio for these three lots (Lots 12, 13 and 20).
The applicant is also requesting the subdivision be developed with private
streets. Per the Subdivision Ordinance private streets shall be discouraged
however private streets maybe approved by the Planning Commission to serve
isolated development. The streets are to be constructed to public street
standards and are only permissible in the form of cul-de-sac and short loop
streets. The lots may develop on private street frontage if explicitly approved by
the Planning Commission. The applicant has indicated the streets will conform to
Master Street Plan design standard with the exception of the sidewalk
placement.
Three of the lots will abut Raines Road and the internal street. A variance to
allow these lots to develop as double frontage lots is not required. (Section 31-
232(d) double frontage lots are prohibited however reverse frontage lots are
permitted where a subdivision abuts or contains an existing or proposed arterial
street, freeway, expressway or railroad right-of-way.)
The proposed development will utilize a private wastewater collection and
treatment facility. The facility is proposed as a Step System utilizing individual
septic tanks to contain the solids while the liquids are pumped off. The liquids
are then collected to a centralized treatment facility where they are treated prior
to release in the Callahan Creek. The applicant will be required to work with the
State Health Department to obtain approvals of this type system.
There is a proposed Collector street shown on the City’s Master Street Plan
along the applicant’s western boundary. Staff has review the Master Street Plan
and has determined a collector street in this area is not necessary due to the
development patterns in the area. The area to the west has developed with the
rear of the homes abutting the proposed Collector street and the proposed
subdivision is to be developed with the rear of the homes abutting the proposed
collector street. Neither subdivision would take access to the street and both are
accessed by cul-de-sac streets. Staff will forward a Master Street Plan
amendment to the Board of Directors should the Commission approve the
removal of the Collector street from the Master Street Plan.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The request is consistent with development patterns in the
area and should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding area.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
6
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff is supportive of the requested five (5) year deferral of Master Street Plan
requirements to Raines Road (1/2 street construction requirement).
Staff is supportive of the request waiver to allow the internal streets and to
maintain internal streets as private streets.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the paved walking trails to
serve as an alternative pedestrian circulation system.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow an increased lot depth to
width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20.
Staff recommends the Master Street Plan be amended to remove a proposed
collector street from the Master Street Plan adjacent to the western boundary of
the proposed development.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 12, 2003)
Mr. Mike Watson of the Mehlburger Firm was present representing the request. There
were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the
above report. Staff also presented positive recommendations of the waivers and
variances to the Subdivision and Master Street Plan Ordinances. Staff stated they were
supportive of the requested five (5) year deferral of Master Street Plan requirements to
Raines Road (1/2 street construction requirement) and the request to allow the internal
streets to be maintained as private streets. Staff stated the request for paved walking
trails to serve as an alternative pedestrian circulation system was also being supported.
Staff presented a positive recommendation of the Subdivision Ordinance variance
request to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20.
Staff stated the Master Street Plan included a proposed Collector Street along the
properties western boundary. Staff stated after a review of the Master Street Plan it
had been determined due to the development pattern in the area Staff was requesting
the proposed Collector Street be removed from the Master Street Plan. Staff stated if
the Commission agreed their recommendation would be forwarded to the Board of
Directors with the amendment request.
John Wallis spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his concerns
were with the discharge of the wastewater system into the creek. He stated his property
adjoined the site to the east and this was the low area of the site. He questioned how
the wastewater collection treatment system would be handled.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
7
Mr. Gary Boyle raised questions concerning the proposed development. He stated he
was the fire chief in the area and he had not been contacted concerning the proposed
development. The Commission questioned why the volunteer fire department was not
contacted. Staff stated this was an oversight and they would work with the fire chief to
resolve his concern. Mr. Boyle stated he had a concern with the development only
allowing one entrance into the subdivision.
Ms. Cindy Nalley stated she also was concerned with the proposed development and
the discharge into the Callaghan Creek. She stated the area was a rural area and the
development of the site with 20 new homes was somewhat intense. She questioned
the requested waiver of street improvements stating Raines Road was a narrow two-
lane road. She stated with the development there would be additional traffic into the
area and the roadway should be widened to accommodate the increased traffic.
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, questioned if the Commission could hear the
item. She stated the Subdivision Ordinance clearly required the submission of approval
from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the wastewater collection and
treatment facility at the time of preliminary plat submittal. Ms. Dawson referred to
Section 31-400 stating the Commission could not vote on the plat until the applicant had
all the required documentation necessary.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed requirements and how
applications in the past had been handled. Staff stated in the past they had not
reviewed an application which would be utilizing a private wastewater collection and
treatment facility.
The applicant stated the Health Department required construction drawing prior to the
issuance of a letter stating a design would work in an area. Staff stated then a letter
stating they would not approve the concept would need to be furnished.
A motion was made to defer the item to the June 26, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion
carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 26, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the applicant was working with the
Arkansas Department of Health to resolve the outstanding wastewater issues related to
the plat. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the July 24,
2003 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
8
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant was not present representing the request. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the August 7,
2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated the request was not received as required by the
Planning Commission By-Laws and would require a waiver of the By-Laws to allow the
deferral.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws to allow the deferral of the request. The
motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent
agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: County Farm Rd. near River Valley Marina Rd.
Request: Single Family and Park / Open Space to Commercial
Source: David Henry, Hudson Enterprises Inc.
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
This application is a Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning
District from Single Family and Park / Open Space to Commercial. The
Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of
products, personal and professional services, and general business activities.
Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that
they serve.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is a marina currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately
10.52+ acres in size. The property to the north is rural property developed with
large lot Single Family residences and limited agricultural uses. All of the
surrounding property to the east, and west is vacant land or large lot residential
zoned R-2 Single Family. The Little Maumelle River borders the applicant’s
property on the south side. The land south of the river is zoned R-2 with a
railroad on the south bank.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On February 18, 2003 multiple changes were made from Transition and Low
Density Residential to Suburban Office, Single Family, Park/Open Space, Low
Density Residential, Office and Public Institutional along both sides of Cantrell
Road within a 1-mile radius south of the applicant’s property.
On July 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family to Park/Open Space
about 1 mile south of the application area at Pankey Park to recognize existing
conditions.
On April 20, 1999 multiple changes were made from Single Family and Low
Density Residential to Park / Open Space, Multifamily, Office, and Mixed Office
Commercial at Cantrell and Black Road about 2/3 of a mile southwest of the
applicant’s property to accommodate proposed development.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
2
The applicant’s property is shown as Single Family and Park / Open Space on
the Future Land Use Plan. All of the land to the north is shown as Single Family
while the land to the east, south, and west is shown as Park / Open Space along
the floodplain of the Little Maumelle River. The land south of the floodplain is
shown as Single Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
County Farm Road is a rural two-lane road shown as a Collector Street on the
Master Street Plan. River Valley Marina Road is a Local street with open
drainage providing access to the marina. River Valley Marina Road would need
improvements to be brought up to the Master Street Plan standards for
commercial streets for any non-residential development in the area covered by
this amendment.
A Class II Bikeway is shown on County Farm Road from Pinnacle Valley Road to
Isbel Lane. The Master Street Plan states that Class II Bikeways should be of
the same construction as the streets on which they are constructed. The
minimum width for a Class II Bikeway is 6 feet back from the curb. If roadway
shoulders are used for bikeways, the shoulder should be six feet wide. This
width should discourage vehicular traffic use and keep the path free of debris.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the
applicant’s property is located along the route of the “Take it to the Edge” Trail.
The “Take it to the Edge” Trail is part of the development concept of a three-trail
loop system around the city. This loop system of trails is intended to link parks,
open space, and recreation areas located along the edges of the city. The “Take
it to the Edge” trail is intended to provide an urban interface with the Arkansas
and Little Maumelle Rivers. The “Take to the Edge” Trail coincides with the
Class II Bikeway shown on the Master Street Plan.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
3
ANALYSIS:
The applicant’s property is located in a low-lying area on the north bank of the
Little Maumelle River outside city limits. The existing commercial uses at the
marina are isolated from other non-residential and non-agricultural uses by both
distance and topography. Any land shown as Commercial at this location would
not have any buffers to the west, north, or east from potential development of
less intense uses. The Little Maumelle River would provide the only buffer
between Commercial uses on the applicant’s property and the land located on
the south bank. A railroad runs parallel to the south bank of the Little Maumelle
River. South of the railroad the land slopes upward to the Walton Heights
subdivision. The railroad and slope may limit the amount of potential land
available for non-residential development on the south bank.
The applicant’s property is located near the “Take it to the Edge” trail. The trail is
situated to take advantage of the recreational opportunities provided by the river
and to provide public an interface with the river. Since the applicant’s property is
situated on the north bank of the Little Maumelle River, future development of the
property could also provide access to the river. If designed correctly, both the
trail and development of the applicant’s could complement each other. However,
the Commercial land use category is broad enough that non-residential
development of the applicant’s property could be incompatible with both the trail
and neighboring land uses. Any type of commercial development that could take
place in an area shown as Commercial should be developed in a way that would
complement the recreational amenities characteristic of the area. In addition,
utilities and other infrastructure would need to be improved to serve any changes
in Commercial uses located on the applicant’s property.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Pleasant Valley
Property Owners Association, River Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey
Community Improvement Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association,
Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, Secluded Hills Property Owners
Association, Walton Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association, Westbury
Neighborhood Association, and Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners
Association. Staff has not received any comments from area residents at this
time.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
4
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. A change to Commercial would
allow a broad range of uses that would be incompatible with neighboring land
uses and recreational amenities of the area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: June 12, 2003
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. The
Planning Commission did not discuss item 17. A motion was made to defer the
item to the July 24, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. The motion was
approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 recuse, and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: July 24, 2003
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the October 16, 2003
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wave the by-laws for a
five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion
was made and approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. A motion
was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
NAME: River Harbor Long-form PCD
LOCATION: County Farm Road east of River Valley Marina Road
DEVELOPER:
101 River Harbor Limited Partnership
P.O. Box 21475
Little Rock, AR 72221
ENGINEER:
Hope Engineers
322 North Market Street
Benton, AR
AREA: 33 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 52 FT. NEW STREET: 2632
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Marina and Single-family (50 residential lots)
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes a two fold development on this 33 acre tract. The
proposal includes the subdivision of 22 acres into 50 single-family residential lots
and the redevelopment of an existing non-conforming commercial uses, River
Valley Marina, located on a 10 acre tract. The site is located within the City’s
Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction but not within the city limits of Little Rock.
The property is located on County Farm Road, south and east of its intersection
with River Valley Marina Road.
The plan is to extend a waterway from the Little Maumelle River and provide 47
of the 50 lots with a waterfront setting. The proposed development is intended to
provide quality residential development and utilize the recreational and scenic
attributes of the Little Maumelle and Arkansas Rivers, and the surrounding area.
The applicant has contact the US Army Corp of Engineers concerning the
extension of the Little Maumelle. A permit has been issued but the previous
permit does not match the existing development. The applicant is working with
the Corp to determine what additional review procedures will be required.
A portion of the proposed project lines in the floodway per the Floodway
Designation Map for Pulaski County. The applicant has indicated they will work
with the County and the Corp of Engineers to remove this area from the
floodway.
The applicant’s project lies outside the city limits and will not be allowed to
connect to the City of Little Rock’s wastewater collection system. The applicant
has indicated a private wastewater collection system. Each unit will have an
individual septic tank where solids are collected. The liquids will be piped to a
centralized location for further treatment before being released.
The applicant has indicated an essential component of the proposed plan is the
redevelopment of the River Valley Marina. The Marina has been in operation on
the site since the late 1960’s. When the City expanded the Extraterritorial
Planning Jurisdiction in the area the site became a non-conforming use. The
proposed plan includes the removal of the existing marina buildings and
complete redevelopment of the site, providing essentially the same commercial
area under roof, but in new structures on a reduced portion of the real property.
The applicant has indicated the existing docks along the Little Maumelle will
remain but will be rehabbed.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
3
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing marina with a bait shop, boat repair and outdoor
storage boats. Along the river are also boats docked in both covered and open
slips. The area of the proposed single-family is currently vacant, grass covered
and being used as a hayfield.
The Little Maumelle River adjoins the site to the south. The area to the east and
the west are currently vacant and also being used as hayfields. The area to the
north of the site is developed with single-family homes on five acre tracts
adjoining the Arkansas River.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Walton Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood Association and the River Valley
Property Owners Association were notified of the Public Hearing along with all
owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents who could
be identified located within 300 feet of the site. As of this writing, staff has
received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed
development.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. County Farm Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a Collector. A
dedication of right-of-way 30-feet form centerline will be required. The 50-feet
wide right-of-way widths for internal roads are acceptable.
2. Provide design of streets conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct 18-
foot half-street improvements to County Farm Road including 5-foot sidewalks
with planned development. Construct other street improvements as shown
(26-feet minimum width plus sidewalks).
3. This property is outside the corporate limits of Little Rock. Stormwater
detention and grading permits are not required.
4. Alteration of the water course will require approval from the Little Rock District
of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start of work.
5. Obtain a NDPES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
6. The proposed alteration of the floodway will require flood map revisions or a
no rise certificate. Obtain conditional approval from Pulaski County and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency prior to start of work.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
4
7. The minimum Finish Floor elevation above the 100 year flood elevation, as
established by Pulaski County, is required to be shown on the plat. (Note:
Maps indicate a base flood elevation of 264 feet or 12 foot above the typical
grade.)
8. Show the limits of the floodway on the proposed plat. Per FEMA regulations,
no fill or building construction is permitted in the floodway.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside service boundary. No connection maybe made to the existing
force main located in County Farm Road.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: SBC has some existing facilities that may need to be relocated or removed
for this construction project. Contact SBC at 373-5112 for additional details.
Central Arkansas Water: Water main extensions will be required in order to
provide fire protection and domestic service to this property. A Capital Investment
Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in
addition to normal charges. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. This development will have minor
impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized
to provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Little Rock
Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family and Park/Open Space for this
property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for
a marina.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on
this agenda.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
5
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required where
commercial property is adjacent to residential to the south, east and west.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Register Landscape Architect.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 22, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff briefly described the
proposal noting additional information was required to complete the review. Staff
requested a preliminary plat to encompass the entire ownership. Staff noted
front platted building lines and easements were the only requirement on the
preliminary plat.
Staff noted the comment from wastewater stating the development would be
required to install their own wastewater collection and treatment facility. The
applicant stated a consultant had been hired to design the system. The applicant
stated the system would include a septic system at each home with solids being
retained and the liquids being pumped to a centralized location for further
treatment before discharge.
Public Works comments were addressed. The applicant noted the streets would
be constructed to Master Street Plan requirement as requested. Staff also noted
the limits of the floodplain and the floodway. There was a general discussion
concerning the development and the requirements for developing in the
floodplain. Staff noted no development could take place in the floodway.
Staff questioned the material of the wall construction and the maintenance of the
wall. The applicant noted the wall would be constructed of wood and the
property owners association would be responsible for maintaining the wall.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
6
Staff questioned if the existing river development would remain. The applicant
stated the existing docks would remain but would be rehabbed.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the May 22, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated a 30-foot platted building line along County Farm Road as required by
the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant has also indicated the linear feet of
internal street within the development. The applicant has stated the streets will
be developed to Master Street Plan standard and be dedicated as public streets.
The applicant has also indicated the areas of outdoor storage. The applicant has
indicated an area near the marina building to be used for overflow boat parking.
The applicant has indicated the current zoning of the single-family portion of the
site as zoned R-2, Single-family but the marina portion as zoned C-4. In the
General Note section the applicant has stated the zoning classification of the
single-family portion as an R-1 Zoning District. The C-4 zoning and the R-1
zoning are stated incorrectly. The entire site is zoned R-2, Single-family with the
marina being a non-conforming use. The proposed zoning classification is PCD
to allow the site to develop as a single-family subdivision and the marina to be
redeveloped.
The applicant has indicated the minimum lot size as 7,000 square feet with the
proposed average lot size being approximately 9,000 square feet. The proposed
lot sizes meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The
commercial lot proposed is also adequate to meet the minimum requirements for
a commercial lot. The remaining portion of the property is located across the
Little Maumelle River. There is currently no access to the site and there is no
access to the site proposed.
The proposed development is intended to allow water access to 47 of the 50
proposed lots. The Little Maumelle River will be dredged to create an
embayment. The applicant is proposing the retaining wall of the bulkhead to be
constructed of wooden pilings. The applicant has indicated the maintenance of
the bulkhead to be by a property owners association. Per the Zoning Ordinance
(Section 36-459) the applicant is to establish in the Bill of Assurance for the
proposed subdivision “… the ownership, operation, construction and
maintenance of private roads, parking areas, common usable open space,
community facilities, recreation areas, building, lighting, security measures and
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
7
similar common elements in a development.” Since a proposed Bill of Assurance
was not submitted to staff for review staff is unsure as to the provision for
maintenance of the retaining walls. Staff would recommend if the proposed
development is approved the applicant establish the Bill of Assurance and work
with the City Attorney’s office to ensure the legal form and effect prior to final
approval of the proposed development.
Per the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-460 the Commission should take into
consideration when reviewing a proposed development the compatibility between
the proposed development and surrounding areas so as to preserve and
enhance the neighborhood. In addition the Commission shall involve a
consideration of water conservation, preservation of natural site, amenities and
the protection of watercourses from erosion and siltation. The Residential
Densities shall be determined on the basis of the following considerations: The
densities of the surrounding development; The densities allowed under the
current zoning; The urban development goals and other policies of the
comprehensive plan, the topography and character of the natural environment,
and the impact of a given density on the specific site and adjacent properties.
Staff does not feel the proposed development meet these criteria.
Per Zoning Ordinance [Section 36-460(h)] “well designed open space is an
important factor in providing for innovative design and visual attractiveness.
Open space shall be evaluated utilizing the following general guidelines: (1) A
minimum of ten to fifteen percent of gross planned residential district areas shall
be designated as common usable open space. (2) Single-family, duplex, zero-
lot-line and townhouse development shall have a minimum of 500 square feet of
usable private open space per unit (3) No more than one-half of the common
usable open space may be covered by water.” Based on 22 acres of single-
family development the applicant would be required approximately 96,000 square
feet of open space. Although, a large portion of the area is designated as
common open space the development appears to indicated approximately 6000
square feet of open space in the form of a neighborhood park. The remainder of
the common open space is to be in the bulkhead, which the entirely may not be
considered as open space per the Zoning Ordinance.
The applicant has also indicated the floodway limits on the proposed site plan.
This information was received from Pulaski County Flood Boundary and
Floodway Map numbered 050179 0258, bearing an effective date of August 5,
1991. Per FEMA regulations, no fill or building construction is permitted in the
floodway. There is a process in which the limits of the floodway may be changed
and the applicant has indicated this process will be undertaken. Staff is not
comfortable with the approval of the proposed development without the
clearance from the Corp of Engineers for relocation of the floodway limits. Staff
would recommend the applicant secure the necessary approval from the Corp of
Engineers prior to the City of Little Rock approval of the proposed development.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
8
To secure the necessary approval from the Corp of Engineers redesign of the
existing layout may be necessary. If this is the case the Commission is required
to re-evaluate the development based on a new layout.
The proposed development will also require alteration of watercourses. The
applicant has a previously approved 404 Permit, which does not match the
existing project. The permit authorized the continuing operation and
maintenance of an existing commercial marina. The authorization includes new
work, consisting of the dredging of, and the incidental redeposit of, dredged
material for a connection between the Little Maumelle River and a new
embayment being constructed for a 250-slip marina. The applicant has stated
they are working with the Corp of Engineers to determine if a major or minor
modification to the existing permit is required. Staff feels this is a key component
of the development. If the permit is not issued the development will not take
place. Staff feels the issues with the Corp of Engineers should be resolved prior
to approval by the City of Little Rock.
The applicant has indicated the development will be served by a private
wastewater collection and treatment facility. Per the Subdivision Ordinance
(Section 31-400) all subdivision shall be provided with a sewage collection and
treatment system approved by the wastewater utility and/or the state board of
health. The sewage collection system shall be designed to handle the
anticipated flow of sewage from within the subdivision, including development of
future sections of the same subdivision and adjacent areas within the same
drainage basin.
The subdivider shall either install the improvements referred to or whenever a
septic tank and absorption system or private water supply is to be provided,
require as a condition in the bill of assurance of the subdivision, that those
facilities shall be installed by the builder of the improvements of the lots in
accordance with Section 31-400 of the City of Little Rock Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant has not provided any details concerning the proposed wastewater
collection and treatment facility nor has the applicant provided staff with any
approvals from the Department of Health or the State Department of
Environmental Quality.
Staff has some great concerns with the proposed development. In staff’s opinion
the proposed development does not meet the intent of the Planned Zoning
District’s General Purpose. The Zoning Ordinance states a PUD is not granted
for the benefit of the applicant, but are used to establish developments that are
compatible with the surrounding area, are harmonious with the character of the
neighborhood, do not have a negative effect upon the future development of the
area, permit coordination of the planning of the land surrounding the PUD or PD
and create a desirable and stable environment.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
9
Staff feels the applicant is premature in the filing of the request. All necessary
approvals have not been obtained to allow the project to develop. There are
approvals needed from the Corp of Engineers concerning building construction in
a floodway, a permit to allow the dredging and creation of the embayment area
and approval of the Department of Health and the Department of Environmental
Quality for the wastewater collection and treatment facility.
The proposed request does not fit with the City of Little Rock’s Future Land Use
Plan. The Plan indicated the site as Park/Open Space and Single Family. There
is a request to amend the Land Use Plan to allow the marina portion of the site to
develop with a Commercial designation. Staff feels a Commercial designation in
this area does not fit. The area is predominately Single Family on the Plan.
Typically the Plan allows for buffers of less intense uses between Commercial
designations and Single Family. The Parks Plan indicates this area as a part of a
trail of parks connecting Two Rivers Park with other areas west of the city.
Further more staff feels the proposed development does not fit with the character
of the surrounding area. The area has developed with homes on large lots (5-
acre tracts). The proposed development would allow for one-quarter acre lots at
best.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed development as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 12, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were objectors present.
Commissioner Lowry stated he would have to recuse on the item due to a conflict of
interest. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated there
were a number of unresolved issues related to the development that warranted
approvals prior to the City approving the development.
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, stated she did not feel the Commission could
hear the item based on the Subdivision Ordinance requirement of Section 31-400 (b).
She stated the wastewater collection and treatment issue would have to be resolved
prior to approval.
Mr. David Henry representing the applicant stated he disagreed with the City Attorney’s
opinion. He stated the development was a community and this requirement did not
apply to the development. He stated the system would be subject to ADEQ (Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality) approval and not the City of Little Rock’s
approval. He stated the approvals could not be secured without the approval of the City
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
10
of Little Rock approving the preliminary plat first. He stated once the City approved the
request then the applicant would work with the Corp of Engineers, the County, FEMA
and the Health Department to resolve the outstanding issues.
Staff stated they did not agree with this request. Staff stated if the project was located
within the City a plat would not be approved because a portion of the development was
located in the floodway.
Mr. Rusty McMullan spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his
concerns were with the discharge of the affluent into the Little Maumelle River. He
stated if the area was flooded the affluent would then be forced into the backwaters of
the Little Maumelle River. He questioned at what point an environmental impact study
would be conducted on the site.
Mr. McMullan stated he was also concerned with the traffic the site would generate. He
stated with the development of 50 single-family lots there would be a significant
increase in the traffic on County Farm Road. He stated the roads in the area were not
equipment to handle such an increase in the amount of traffic.
Mr. Louis Bianco spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his
primary concern was that of the lack of city services such as wastewater collection and
fire protection. He stated there were two (2) subdivisions currently under construction in
the area both of which received all the necessary approval prior to the City approving
the preliminary plat.
Mr. Paul Cook spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated with the
current FEMA regulations the homes would be required to be constructed at a minimum
of 12-feet above the road. He stated this would look out of place in the area. He stated
currently the homes were constructed on five (5) acre tracts and the proposed
development was out of character.
Ms. Ruth Bell spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated if the City
had a check list and went down the list checking off all the things that the subdivision
met then few items that would be checked off.
There was a general discussion concerning if the Commission should be considering
the request. The were a general consensus the application should be deferred for six
(6) weeks to resolve as many outstanding issues associated with the proposed request
as possible.
A motion was made to defer the item to the July 24, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion
carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 ones, 1 absent and 1 recuse (Bob Lowry).
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
11
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. David Henry was present representing the request. There were objectors present.
Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 16, 2003
Public Hearing. Staff stated the request for the deferral was not received as required by
the Planning Commission By-Laws and would require a waiver of the By-Laws to allow
the deferral.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws to allow the deferral of the request. The
motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent
agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: LU03-11-03
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-430 Planning District
Location: Northwest corner of Wilson St. and W. 20th St.
Request: Single Family to Office
Source: Mystery Willis, c/o McGetrick & McGetrick Inc.
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the I-430 Planning District from Single Family to
Office. The Office category represents services provided directly to consumers
(e.g., legal, financial, medical) as well as general offices, which support more
basic economic activities. The applicant wishes to develop the property for quite
business uses.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded
the area of review to include the area between Wilson Street and Aldersgate
Road north of W. 20th Street to W. 18th Street, and the area west of Wilson Street
north of W. 18th Street to the areas currently shown as Suburban Office. With
these changes, the entirety of the Single Family west of Wilson Street north of W.
20th Street would be eliminated. This would establish Wilson Street and W. 20th
Street as the boundary between residential and non-residential uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is a house currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately
1.25 + acres in size. The expanded area is developed with scattered single
family housing zoned R-2. The property on the west side of Aldersgate Road is
developed with two office buildings zoned Planned Office Development. The
vacant land on the north side of W. 18th Street west of Perry Street is vacant land
zoned O-2 Office and Institutional. Further north the land on the west side of
Perry Street (west of the expanded area) is zoned R-2 and developed with
scattered single-family housing. One lot at the end of Perry Street, on the west
side, is zoned R-7A Mobile Home for manufactured housing located on that
property. The land north of the expanded area is zoned O-2 and developed with
office buildings. A strip of land at the north boundary of the expanded study
area is zoned Open Space from Aldersgate Road to Junior Deputy Road. All of
the land east of Wilson Street and south of W. 20th Street is zoned R-2 and
developed with scattered single-family housing. The property at southwest
corner of the Aldersgate Road / W. 20th intersection is zoned Open Space for
Camp Aldersgate.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-11-03
2
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On March 18, 2003 a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office
at the northeast corner of Aldersgate Road and W. 18th Street less than ¼ of a
mile northwest of the applicant’s property to establish W. 18th Street as a
boundary between residential and non-residential uses and to provide protection
to the Single Family uses through the use of Planned Zoning Developments.
On November 4, 2002 a change was made from Single Family to Low Density
Residential along Lehigh Street about 1 mile southeast of the application area to
provide higher density residential development.
On September 4, 2001 a change was made from Park/Open Space to Multi-
family less than ¼ of a mile to the east of the property in question to
accommodate proposed development.
On April 6, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office
along the west side of Aldersgate Road in the 1600 through 1900 blocks less
than ¼ of a mile west of the study area to accommodate proposed development.
On March 2, 1999 multiple changes were made along the south side of Kanis
Road starting about ½ of a mile northwest of the area in question from Mixed
Office Commercial and Suburban Office to Neighborhood Commercial, Office,
and Community Shopping to recognize existing conditions.
The applicant’s property and the expanded area are shown as Single Family on
the Future Land Use Plan. All of the property to the west and north of the
expanded area is shown as Suburban Office while all of the property to the east
and south is shown as Single Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Wilson and W. 20th Streets are classified as Local Streets built for residential
traffic. These streets would need to be improved to handle commercial traffic.
There are no Bikeways shown that would be affected by this amendment.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the
applicant’s property lies in a service deficit area. Adequate park facilities would
need to be developed in order to fulfill the plan goals of providing park facilities
within an eight-block walking distance of all City of Little Rock Residents.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-11-03
3
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant’s property lies in an area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan. The business and commercial development goal
contains the objectives of attracting job-generating businesses to the area and
encouragement of land assembly guidelines for construction of new business
and commercial facilities.
ANALYSIS:
Although the area shown as Single Family contains vacant pieces of property,
new housing is being constructed in this neighborhood. The Plan has tried to
keep the non-residential uses west of Aldersgate Road and north of W. 18th
Street west of Perry Street. Even when allowing these non-residential uses, they
were to be designed such that residential could be a viable option on the east
side of the areas shown as Suburban Office.
The strip of land zoned Open Space from Aldersgate Road to Junior Deputy
Road is intended to serve as a boundary between the non-residential uses south
of Kanis Road and the residential areas further to the south. This amendment
would further extend non-residential uses in an area south of W. 18th Street and
south of the Open Space zoned buffer.
In addition, this amendment area is located in an area of revitalizing single-family
development. The property in question is located in the Hicks Interurban
Addition, a neighborhood that has seen an increase in building permit activity
within the past five years. Thirteen building permits for new single-family houses
have been issued for the neighborhood within the past five years. Four of those
permits were issued in 2001, while five were issued during 2002. The trend of
increasing building permits for single family housing east of Aldersgate Road
indicates that this neighborhood is a growing and viable single-family residential
area. This amendment would introduce a use that is incompatible with the
current trend of single-family residential development in the area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: John Barrow
Neighborhood Association, Campus Place Property Owners Association,
Kensington Place Property Owners Association, Pennbrook/Clover Hill Property
Owners Association, Sandpiper Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "A"
Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "B" Special Improvement District, Twin
Lakes B Prop. Owners Association, and Westbrook Neighborhood Association.
Staff has received one comment from area residents. Staff has received one
comment from area residents in support of the change.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-11-03
4
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This amendment would extend non-
residential uses into the heart of a revitalizing residential neighborhood and
compromise the viability of that neighborhood.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: May 15, 2003
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 26, 2003
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent
agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: June 26, 2003
During the consent agenda, Pat McGetrick, the applicant stated that he wished to
defer the application to July 24, 2003 since he was going to have only eight
commissioners eligible to vote. The overall consent agenda was approved with a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent with a recusal from Fred Allen on this item.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: July 24, 2003
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Monte
Moore made a presentation of item D so the discussion could coincide with the
discussion for item C. See item D for a complete discussion concerning the
rezoning from R-2 Single Family to O-1 Quiet Office.
Pat McGetrick, representing the applicant, spoke on behalf of the applicant and
gave a brief description of the applicant’s plans for the property and the reasons
for choosing this site for developing quiet offices.
A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with
a vote of 0 ayes, 9 noes, 1 absent, and 1 recuse. Commissioner Fred Allen
recused from the item.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7399
Owner: Mystery Willis
Applicant: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineering
Location: Northwest corner of West 20th and Wilson Streets, and along
the east side of Perry Street
Area: Approximately 1.29 acres (8 lots)
Request: To rezone from R-2 to O-1
Purpose: Quiet Office
Existing Use: Vacant (6 lots) and single family structure (2 lots)
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Single Family Residences; zoned R-2
South – Single Family Residences (across West 20th Street); zoned R-2
East – Single Family Residences (across Wilson Street); zoned R-2
West – Single Family Residences; zoned R-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. The proposed land use would classify Perry, Wilson, and West 20th
Streets on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate
right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
2. This development does not have access to an existing collector or
improved commercial street suitable for office development. All
existing streets in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning action are
unimproved, narrow, residential streets with open ditches and nine-foot
wide travel.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7399
2
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located near CATA’s part-time bus route #3 (Baptist Medical
Center route).
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the John Barrow, Twin Lakes ”A”
and Twin Lakes “B” Special Improvement District Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the proposed rezoning.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for O-1
Quiet Office for an office building.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Office is a separate item on
this agenda.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in an area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan. The housing and neighborhood revitalization
goal contains an action statement of determining if existing zoning
classifications compromise the interest to revitalize or stabilize the housing
and infrastructure and improve the overall appearance of the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Mystery Willis, owner of Lots 5-6 and 19-24, Block 10, Hicks Interurban
Addition, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family
District to “O-1” Quiet Office District. Six of the lots (Lots 19-24) are
located at the northwest corner of West 20th and Wilson Streets, with two
lots (Lots 5 and 6) being located within the west portion of the block along
Perry Street. There is a new single family structure on Lots 21 and 22,
with the remaining lots being undeveloped and wooded. The owner
proposes the rezoning in order to use the existing structure as an office,
with future quiet office developments on the remaining six lots.
All of the properties adjacent to this site, including across the boundary
streets, are zoned R-2 and contain single family residential structures. A
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7399
3
rezoning to O-2 with a height restriction was recently approved for 12 lots
along the north side of West 18th Street, between Aldersgate Road and
Perry Street.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as single family.
A proposed land use plan amendment for a change to office is Item 5. on
this agenda.
Staff does not support the proposed rezoning. Staff feels that the
proposed O-1 zoning will not be compatible with the adjacent single family
properties. Staff clearly supported the recent O-2 rezoning at the
northeast corner of West 18th and Aldersgate Road given the fact that it is
directly across the street from a large multi-lot office development (POD),
and the imposed height limitation and site plan review requirement will
assure proper transition from the existing POD development to the
residential uses to the east. Staff feels that any further intrusion east into
the existing area of R-2 zoning will be a detriment to the area. During the
past two years, several building permits for new homes (including Lots 21
and 22 of this property) have been issued within the R-2 zoned area
between Aldersgate Road and Junior Deputy Road, south of the West 16th
Street right-of-way.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested O-1 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 15, 2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested the application be
deferred to the June 26, 2003 agenda, as the applicant failed to complete the
required notifications to surrounding property owners. Staff supported the
deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the June 26, 2003 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The item
was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 26, 2003)
Pat McGetrick was present, representing the application. He requested that the
application be deferred to the July 24, 2003 agenda. Staff supported the deferral
request.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7399
4
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the July 24, 2003 agenda. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The
item was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Pat McGetrick was present, representing the application. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial.
This item and the land use plan amendment were discussed simultaneously.
Pat McGetrick addressed the Commission in support of the application. He
noted that the existing building would be used for quiet office and that similar
structures would be built on the other lots.
Commissioner Floyd asked why the property owner wanted quiet office use on
this particular property. Mr. McGetrick noted that the owner thought that this was
a good location for a quiet office development. He referred to the office
developments further to the north along Kanis Road.
There was motion to approve the land use plan amendment. The motion failed
by a vote of 0 ayes, 9 nays and 2 absent.
There was a second motion to approve the rezoning. The motion failed by a vote
of 0 ayes, 9 nays and 2 absent. The application was denied.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-4849-A
NAME: Sipe Ministries Day Care – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 8619, 8705 and 8707 Stanton Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Sipe Ministries, Inc./Terry Burruss
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
phased redevelopment of this existing private school
– daycare. The property is zoned R-2.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the east side of Stanton Road, 500 feet north of
Baseline Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The school has been in operation at this location for 20± years. The
proposal is to replace the older buildings now being used with new
buildings and to construct some much needed on-site parking. The site is
located in an area of mixed zoning and uses and the proposed
redevelopment of this existing use should be compatible with the
neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Upper Baseline,
Windamere and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations
were notified of this request. On June 10, 2003, the Upper Baseline
Neighborhood Association voted to support the application.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The school currently has an enrollment of 70 students and 10 employees;
requiring 17 parking spaces under current guidelines, Phase I will add 3
more spaces, bringing the total number of on-site parking spaces to 17.
Phase II will add 6 employees and 70 children. Phase III will add 7
employees and another 70 children. New parking will be built in phases
corresponding to the new enrollment and added employees. Ultimately
the site will have 210 children and 23 employees; requiring 44 parking
spaces. The new parking lot will contain 43 spaces. With the drop-off
spaces along the front of the property, there will be more than enough
parking on site. In Phase II, one of the existing driveways will be closed,
leaving 1 entry-only driveway and 2 exit-only driveways.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4849-A
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Tree Protection Ordinance is
required.
The land use buffers along the northern and southern perimeters drop
below the nine (9) foot width requirement of the zoning ordinance and the
six (6) feet and nine (9) inches requirement of the landscape ordinance.
The street buffer drops below the twenty-eight (28) foot width requirement
average and the fourteen (14) foot width minimum allowed at any given
point.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along
the northern perimeter of the site being developed.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. The existing right-of-way of 30’ from centerline meets master street
plan requirements.
2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for future stormwater detention facilities on the plan
and locations of all storm water entering and leaving the site.
3. Driveway locations do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Two driveways should be
closed with one-way driveway circulation northbound.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comments received.
Reliant: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water
meter(s) are required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size
of the meter connection(s) will apply for additional meters for this
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4849-A
3
project in addition to normal charges. All Central Arkansas Water
requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be
met.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comments received.
CATA: No comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 5, 2003)
Terry Burruss and Edman Sipe were present representing the application. Staff
presented the item and noted that much more information was needed on
specifics of the development. A lengthy list of needed information was
presented. The applicant was advised to provide the needed details by June 11,
2003. Public Works and Landscape Comments were presented. The applicant
was advised that the required closure of the driveways could correspond to the
phased development of the site.
After advising the applicant to provide the needed information to staff, the
Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned property located at 8619, 8705 and 8707 Stanton Road is
occupied by Sipes Ministries Day Care. The property contains 4, one-story
buildings and 1, two-story building. The one-story buildings house classrooms
and the two-story building contains an activity center on the ground floor and
offices on the second floor. Four driveways provide access to a gravel parking
area located along the front of the buildings, adjacent to Stanton Road. The day
care has an enrollment of 70 students and 10 employees. The day care is a
nonconforming use having been in place prior to the property’s annexation into
the City. Hours of operation are Monday through Friday, 6:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. A
small, fenced playground is located directly behind the activities building and an
open, play area is located on most of the rear of the property. Children’s ages
range from 18 month to 5 years. The property is enclosed with a combination of
chainlink and privacy fencing.
The applicant is proposing the phased redevelopment of the property, resulting in
the removal of all one-story buildings and replacement with 3 new buildings. An
increase in enrollment is proposed and a new parking lot will be constructed.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4849-A
4
The new buildings will be a combination of masonry/metal siding with a metal
roof. The buildings will be 18± feet in height and will have a roof pitch of 2:12.
Phase I consists of the removal of the northernmost building and construction of
a new, 5,400 square foot building in its place. Three parking spaces will be built
at the north end of the property to provide the needed 17 spaces. No change to
the current enrollment of 70 children and 10 employees is proposed in Phase I.
Phase II consists of the removal of a second one-story building, construction of a
new, 5,400 square foot building in its place, construction of a portion of the new
parking lot and removal of one of the four driveways onto Stanton Road. The
southernmost driveway will become a one-way entry only and the two
northernmost driveways will be one-way exit only. By having two exit driveways,
parents dropping off or picking up children at the middle (Phase II) building will
not have to drive in front of the Phase I building to exit the site. Staff believes it is
appropriate to require the paving of the existing gravel driveway/parking area
adjacent to Stanton Road in conjunction with Phase II since this phase will result
in the closure of one of the driveways and construction of a portion of the new,
paved parking lot. This phase will also result in 6 additional employees and an
expansion in enrollment to 140 students.
Phase III consists of the removal of the two southernmost one-story buildings,
construction of a single, 5,400 square foot building in their place and completion
of the new paved parking lot. This phase will result in 7 additional employees for
a total of 23 and in increase in enrollment to 210 students.
The two-story office/activity building will remain. A 640 square foot grounds
building will be built at some point. No changes are proposed to fencing or the
play areas. No signage plan has been submitted but staff would recommend that
any new signage comply with the office/institutional district standards.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit. Redevelopment of
the site with new buildings and paved parking should be a positive for the
neighborhood. Even at full enrollment, the day care should be compatible with
uses and zoning in the area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5
and 6 of this report.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4849-A
5
2. Compliance with the approved site plan and the proposed phasing plan.
3. With Phase II the existing gravel driveway and parking area located in
front of the buildings adjacent to Stanton Road is to be paved and
landscaped with additional landscaping to offset the reduced street buffer.
4. With Phase II one of the two southern driveways is to be removed
resulting in 1 entry-only driveway and 2 exit-only driveways.
5. All new signage is to comply with office and institutional standards. No
new ground-mounted signs are to be erected on the site without existing
ground-mounted signs being removed.
6. Any new site lighting is to be shielded and aimed downward and into the
site.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 26, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the applicant had not completed the required notification
and the item needed to be deferred. A letter of support had been submitted by
SWLR United for Progress and the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
July 24, 2003 meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: Z-4587-C
NAME: Hunters Green Estates Revised PD-R
LOCATION: #91 Hunters Green Circle
DEVELOPER:
Diane Hughes
#91 Hunters Green Circle
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
Donald Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72006
AREA: 0.129 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-R
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential - rear platted building line adjustment.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On April 18, 1995, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 16,872 establishing
Hunters Green PD-R. The approved development included 50 single-family lots and a
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-C
2
large common area. Also included in the development was a six foot high brick fence,
built around the perimeter of the property.
On June 2, 1998 the Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 17,736 to allow the
revision of the PD-R for the six-foot brick wall behind Lots 9, 10 and 11 (located in the
northeast portion of the development) to be increased to nine feet.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing the placement of a 216 square foot sunroom on the
rear of the existing structure, which will extend beyond the rear platted building
line. The applicant is requesting the rear platted building line be revised to allow
the construction of the sunroom. A patio was constructed on the home in 1998,
which also extends into the platted building line but only a portion of the patio
area projects into the side yard more than 30-inches because of the slope of the
lot. The request is to also correct this intrusion across the platted building line.
The applicant is proposing to replat the lot upon approval to adjust the rear
building line to recognize existing conditions as well as to allow the addition.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family structure accessed by Hunters Green
Circle. The area has developed with single-family homes of approximately 2500
square feet on roughly 5700 square foot lots.
The development is surrounded by a six foot wall. The wall is not located on the
property line and with the angle of the wall, it bisects the applicant’s rear yard
leaving only a portion of the applicant’s rear yard as useable.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls and letters in support of
the request from area residents. Staff has also received one phone call with a
concern of privacy should the sunroom have windows on the north side. The
Hunters Green Property Owners Association along with all owners of property
located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified,
located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. No comment.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-C
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No comment.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied
for a revision of an existing Planned Residential Development to add a sunroom
to a house.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in an
area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan does not
contain any goals, objectives, or action statements relevant to this case.
Landscape: No comment.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff indicated to the Committee members there
were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff noted
the request was to revise a previously approved Planned Residential
Development to allow a reduced rear platted building line. Staff stated the
applicant was proposing an addition to the existing single-family home, which
would encroach across the rear platted building line and since the development
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-C
4
was approved as a planned development, the remedy was to revised the PRD to
allow the construction.
There being no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The request is to allow for a revision to a previously approved Planned
Residential Development to reduce the rear platted building line around a
proposed addition. The site contains an existing single-family home and the
applicant desires to construct a 216 square foot sunroom on the rear of the
structure. Staff feels the revision is appropriate and should have no adverse
impact on the surrounding neighborhood if constructed.
There has been concern of privacy from one resident of the subdivision. The
subdivision was developed with one of the side yards being the property line.
The caller expressed concern with the addition of the sunroom and windows
being placed along the northern side this would intrude into the adjoining
property owner’s rear yard private area. Staff does not feel this is the case. The
sunroom addition does not extend into the rear yard setback any further than the
existing patio area.
There is a Bill of Assurance in place for the subdivision. There is no indication
the proposed request would violate the Bill of Assurance.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to amend the existing PD-R
to allow a reduced platted building line.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Ms. Dianne Hughes was present representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated
with the proposed request. Staff stated they were supportive of the request to amend
the existing PD-R to allow a reduced rear platted building line around the sunroom
addition.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-C
5
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-5944-A
NAME: Williams Short-form PCD
LOCATION: 3221 John Barrow Road
DEVELOPER:
Larry Williams
3222 John Barrow Road
Little Rock, AR 72204
ENGINEER:
Rowland, Inc
P.O. Box 9003
Little Rock, AR
AREA: 0.89 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 6 (1 zoning lot) FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
ALLOWED USES: Various retail uses - indoor.
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3 uses and a used car lot with a limited number of cars to be
located on an existing vacant lot.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Waiver of right-of-way dedication to John
Barrow Road and West 32nd Street.
BACKGROUND:
A request was denied by the Planning Commission on April 4, 1995 to allow the site be
by utilized for rental of U-Haul trucks and trailers. The office activity was to take place
from the convenience store located on the site.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5944-A
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing to utilize an existing vacant graveled lot (Lot 7) to
display eight (8) to ten (10) vehicles and to utilize the site for the sale of
automobiles. The applicant has indicated Lot 7 would accommodate
approximately fifteen vehicles with right-angle parking. The applicant has stated
ten of the spaces will be utilized by the auto dealership and the remaining five
spaces will be used as customer parking.
The office operation of the business will take place in the tobacco shop, which is
located on Lot 8. The applicant has stated there will be no auto repair taking
place on the site.
There are no new curb-cuts proposed as a part of the development. The
applicant has indicated the site will utilize the existing curb-cuts from John
Barrow Road. The applicant has also indicated the site will be screened and
landscaped per city code.
The applicant is requesting a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street
improvements to John Barrow Road and West 32nd Street.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing commercial strip center with a four bay self-service
carwash facility. There is a vacant gravel lot located adjacent to West 32nd
Street. The uses in the center include a tobacco store, beauty shop, and a tax
preparation service.
The area to the east of the site is vacant as well as the area to the north of the
site. There is a church located on the northwest corner of West 32nd Street and
John Barrow Road and a mixed commercial development located on the
southwest corner of West 33rd Street and John Barrow Road. Located south of
the site are a mixture of commercial uses such as a day care, food service and
office uses.
Abutting the site to the east are single-family homes. Although the area contains
vacant lots, the area adjoining the development to the east does not contain any
vacant lots.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
John Barrow Neighborhood Association along with all owners of property located
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5944-A
3
within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within
300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. West 32nd and West 33rd Streets are classified on the Master Street Plan as
commercial streets. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
2. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with
the planned development.
3. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the two intersections
(West 32nd Street and John Barrow Road and West 33rd Street and John
Barrow Road).
4. Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Section 31-175 and the “MSP”.
5. Close one driveway. Consult Traffic Engineering at 379-1818 for additional
details.
6. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work.
7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
8. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186(e).
9. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding streetlight requirements.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or
additional water meter(s) are required. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to
evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire facilities
will be required. If additional water facilities are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated,
contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the
developer. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5944-A
4
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The
applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a strip retail
center and car lot.
The proposal for a strip retail center does not require a change to the Land Use
Plan. The car lot is proposed as an ancillary use to the strip commercial center
and an existing business and would not have a significant impact on the Land
Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in an
area covered by the John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan has a
goal of enhancing the climate directed towards encouraging new businesses and
commercial establishments to locate in the area but does not list objectives or
action statements relevant to this case.
Landscape: A nine (9) foot wide on-site street buffer is required along Barrow
Road. The landscape ordinance also requires a nine (9) foot wide on-site
landscape strip along Barrow Road and a nine (9) foot wide landscape strip
along the northern perimeter of the site.
A total of eight (8) percent of the expanded vehicular use area must be
landscaped with interior landscaping islands.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff briefly described the
request to the Committee members noting additional information needed on the
proposed site plan. Staff requested the applicant indicate fencing and signage
proposed as a part of the development. Staff also noted the parking area would
have to be constructed of a hard surface material and requested the applicant
include a striping plan. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours
of operation of the proposed automobile sales business.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5944-A
5
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the applicant would be
required to dedicate right-of-way for all boundary streets and to construct the
streets to Master Street Plan standard. Staff requested one of the driveways
from John Barrow Road be closed as a part of the development. Staff stated in
the case of a hardship an in-lieu contribution was possibility.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a nine-foot wide on-site
street buffer would be required along John Barrow Road and West 32nd Street.
Staff stated this was a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance (Land Use Buffer)
and the Landscape Ordinance. Staff noted if the applicant could not meet the
Landscape Ordinance, a waiver from the City Beautiful Commission would be
required. Staff also noted the new parking area would be required to be
landscaped, including interior islands.
There being no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant failed to furnish staff with the requested additional information from
the Subdivision Committee meeting. Without this additional information, staff is
unable to review the proposal from a technical standpoint. Staff recommends
this item be deferred to the September 4, 2003 Public Hearing.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the item be deferred to the September 4, 2003 Public Hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant had failed to furnish staff with the requested information after the July 3, 2003
Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommended the item be deferred to the
September 4, 2003 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent
agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
NAME: Enoch’s School of Beauty Revised Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: 14116 Taylor Loop Road
DEVELOPER:
Enoch Miller
14116 Taylor Loop Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
Civil Design, Inc.
14104 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.699 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-C
ALLOWED USES: Single chair beauty salon
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Beauty School – Up to 15 students
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 17,696 on March 17, 1998
establishing McDonald Short-form PD-C located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road. The
approval allowed the 700 square foot basement to become a beauty shop with a single
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
2
chair stylist and one manicurist. The applicant proposed to maintain the residential
character of the site and to remain living in the home. The applicant proposed a single
ground mounted sign to identify the beauty shop business. The sign was to be a
maximum of three feet in height and six square feet in area (2’ x 3’).
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant currently operates a salon from the site and proposes to convert
the existing use to a cosmetology school. The structure is a single-family
structure with four parking spaces located in the front yard area.
The applicant is proposing 15 students and the placement of 23 parking spaces
in the rear of the structure. The hours of operation are proposed as Tuesday
through Saturday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. The Saturday hours of operation are
bi-weekly only.
The applicant has indicated a right-of-way dedication of 40-feet from the
centerline and is requesting an in-lieu contribution for the Master Street Plan
requirement of the widening of Taylor Loop Road.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family structure in which the applicant
operates a one chair beauty salon. The site adjoins a PCD, which was originally
approved for the former Harvest Foods Store and is currently being used by
David Claiborne Antique Mall. There was a 100-foot land use buffer approved as
a part of the development to separate the commercial use from the single-family
homes located to the south. There is a PD-O located north of the site and is
being used as a veterinarian office and a POD located to the east of the site
currently being used as an office use.
The uses along Cantrell Road are for the most part non-residential uses in this
area but the area to the south, along Taylor Loop Road, are primarily single-
family homes. The site adjoins the Westchester Subdivision to the southwest,
which is predominately built out. Southeast of the site is the Secluded Hills
Subdivision, which is also predominately built out.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls both in support and in
opposition of the proposed change in use from area residents. The
Westchester/Heatherbrae and the Charleston Height/North Rahling Road
Neighborhood Associations, along with all owners of property located within 200
feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet
of the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Taylor Loop Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial.
A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with
the planned development. An in-lieu payment is acceptable.
3. Driveway must be re-located to center of property. This may be deferred until
street is widened.
4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
5. A Grading Permit will be required per Section 29-186 (c) and (d).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: An RPZ backflow preventer will be required on the
domestic service because this is to be a beauty shop. Contact Central Arkansas
Water at 992-2438 if additional water service is needed.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant
has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial Development for a
new beauty school.
The uses proposed with the Planned Commercial Development are of a public -
quasi-public nature. Therefore, as with all Public Institutional uses a Land Use
Plan amendment is not required.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
4
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan does
not contain any goals, objectives, or action statements relevant to this case.
Landscape: The proposed parking lot expansion does not allow for the nine (9)
foot wide northern land use buffer and landscaping strip required by both the
zoning and landscape ordinances. Additionally, the proposed land use buffer
along the western perimeter adjacent to residential property drops below the
eighteen (18) foot width requirement.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
northern perimeter and that portion of the western perimeter adjacent to
residential property.
A total of eight (8) percent of the interior of the vehicular use area must be
landscaped with interior landscaping islands of at least 150 square feet in area
and 7 ½ feet in width.
Efforts should be made to preserve at least some of the large trees in the back
yard.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated a Planned
Development had been previously approved to allow a beauty salon to operate
on the site. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting the use of the site as a
beauty school. Staff stated the applicant was proposing the placement of parking
in the rear of the structure for the staff and students.
Staff requested the applicant provide the number of students and the area of the
structure, which would be used as the school. Staff questioned if the existing
beauty salon would remain open. Staff also requested the applicant provide
details concerning signage both existing and proposed.
Public Works comments were discussed. Staff stated the applicant would be
required to dedicate right-of-way along Taylor Loop Road 45-feet from centerline.
Staff also stated Taylor Loop Road should be constructed to Master Street Plan
standard. Staff stated an in-lieu payment for street construction could be
supported if the applicant chose to request an in-lieu payment. Staff noted when
the roadway was widened the driveway would need to be moved to the center of
the property.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
5
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the rear of the property
contained several large trees and the City Beautiful Commission recommended
preserving as many mature trees as possible. Staff stated at least seventy
percent of the critical root zone should be protect to ensure survivability of the
trees.
Staff noted the proposed plan did not include areas set aside for interior
landscaping of the vehicular use area. Staff stated the interior landscaping
islands were required to be at least 150 square feet in area and seven and one-
half feet in width. Staff also noted the parking lot expansion did not allow for the
nine foot wide northern land use buffer and landscaping strip required by both the
zoning and landscape ordinances. Staff stated the western land use buffer
dropped below the eighteen foot minimum.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The applicant has also
increased interior parking lot planters as required by the landscape ordinance.
The applicant has indicated 23 parking spaces on the site plan and three
handicap spaces. The typical minimum required parking for a school would be
one space per 200 square feet or three spaces. The applicant is proposing a
maximum fifteen-student enrollment, which would require one space per student.
The applicant would also need parking for customers of the beauty school. Staff
feels the proposed 23 parking spaces should be sufficient to meet the anticipated
parking demand.
The applicant is proposing the placement of the parking spaces in the rear yard.
The parking will be accessed by a single drive approximately 12-feet wide along
the northern boundary of the property. The proposed drive will not allow for two-
way traffic but with the current location of the house there is not an alternative to
the driveway width.
The proposed site plan does not allow for the required land use buffer along the
northern property line. The placement of the drive to the rear parking area will
not allow for the minimum nine foot landscape strip as required by both the
zoning and landscape ordinances. Staff is not supportive of the reduced buffer.
With the adjoining vacant lot the use has not yet been determined and staff feels
the use could become a single-family residential structure. Staff feels the nine
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
6
feet is a minimal separation and should not be waived. The applicant will be
required to seek a waiver from the City Beautiful Commission should the
Commission deem the proposed reduced strip adequate (approximately two
feet).
The applicant has indicated there will not be any additional site lighting. The
applicant has stated he will continue to live in the upstairs portion of the home.
The applicant is proposing the placement of a 4’ x 8’ x 5’ rock and wood sign.
The sign is proposed to be located along the street within the proposed right-of-
way dedication. The applicant would be required to franchise the placement of
the sign in the right-of-way if approved.
The applicant has also indicated drainage and detention will be installed on the
site. There are concerns from downstream neighbors of potential flooding
problems. The applicant has indicated curbing will divert the parking lot water
and the front yard water will be captured through a French drain system and
piped to a collection area to be released. The applicant will be required to
contain the water captured and slowly released to not allow any additional
downstream flooding problems.
The applicant has indicted the area previously set aside for the beauty salon will
be utilized for the beauty school. The area set aside previously was 700 square
feet located in the basement of the single-family home. The applicant has
indicated the beauty salon will not remain if the beauty school is allowed to
operate on the site. Staff has concerns with the square footage proposed for the
beauty school. Staff feels with 15 students 700 square feet will not meet the
needs to the students to operate and meet their instructional needs.
The applicant has indicated there is not a bill of assurance in enforce for the
proposed site.
Staff is not supportive of the request. Staff feels the proposed placement of the
beauty school on the site and the increased traffic to the site does not lend itself
to maintaining the residential character of the neighborhood. In addition staff
feels the placement of the parking in the rear of the structure takes away any
future possibility of the structure returning to residential. Although, there are non-
residential uses in the area, they are more closely related to Highway 10.
This site is adjoins a Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to the west and
single-family homes to the south. The use to the west is accessed by Highway
10 and Taylor Loop Road but customers travel a very short distance on Taylor
Loop Road to enter the site. In addition, a large portion of the applicant’s
property lies in the 100-foot buffer area of the PCD located to the west of the site.
Although the site is currently being used as a beauty salon, the use is limited in
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
7
scale to a single operator and a single manicurist. Staff does not feel this limited
use is intrusive to the neighborhood.
Staff feels the line has been drawn along Taylor Loop Road and should not be
extended any further south. Staff feels to maintain the residential integrity of the
neighborhood, the site should remain as was previously approved and the
residential character of the structure should be maintained. Staff does not feel
the paving of a large portion of the rear yard would maintain the residential
integrity of the structure or the neighborhood. And as previously stated although
several of the homes adjoin a non-residential use there is a 100 foot undisturbed
buffer between the homes and the commercial use.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant, Enoch Miller, was present representing the request. There were
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff
stated the applicant intended to utilize 2500 square feet of the structure as the beauty
school with 15 students. Staff stated state law required the applicant to have chairs for
25 students. Staff stated the zoning would limit the site to 15 students. Staff stated the
proposed development would not enhance the single-family neighborhood and the
paving with 10 parking spaces in the rear would take away from the residential
character of the structure.
Mr. Miller stated the property located to the north was zoned residentially and the sign
posed indicated the site as a possible commercial site. He stated the property was
listed for $376,000 and the site would most likely not sell as residential.
Mr. Miller stated he would utilize 2500 square feet of space for the school but would limit
himself to 15 students. He stated he had contacted the antique mall located to the north
concerning leasing additional parking. He stated he did not pursue final negotiations
since he did not know if the development would be approved. He stated if the
development were approved he would secure necessary parking from the adjacent
landowner.
Mr. Michael Saar spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated he was
the president of the Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association. Mr. Saar
stated he would like to reinforce the staff recommendation of denial. He stated the
proposed development was not consistent with the land use plan. He stated the
proposed request was not consistent with the approved planned development in that a
single chair salon did not generate the traffic a beauty school would generate. Mr. Saar
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-A
8
stated the applicant had indicated no trees would be removed from the previous
approval and the applicant had removed seven trees in the front yard area.
Mr. Miller stated the site was rezoned in 1998 and the trees that were removed were
removed because of the insulation of city sewer to the site. He stated the students
were on the clock hour method. He stated students did occasionally leave the site for
lunch and errands but most students remained on the site from 8:00 am to 2:30 pm. He
stated the students were in class, servicing customers or working on their mannequin.
Mr. Miller stated the area was development as non-residential uses with the antique
mall, three banks and a 24-hour Wal-Green’s on the corner of Highway 10 and Taylor
Loop Road.
A motion was made to approve the proposed request as amended to include the
10 parking spaces in the rear and the use of 2500 square feet of the structure as the
beauty school.
The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 4 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: LU03-18-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District
Location: 18425 Kanis Rd.
Request: Single Family to Suburban Office
Source: Bruce Henry
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Single Family to
Suburban Office. The Suburban Office category shall provide low intensity
development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower density residential areas
to assure compatibility. A Planned Zoning District is required.
Staff has not expanded the application. Expansion of this application to connect with
any other non-residential uses would require an expansion of a half mile along Kanis in
either direction which would be premature at this time.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is 1.47 + acres of vacant land zoned R-2 Single Family. Most of the
neighboring property is zoned R-2 Single Family with houses built on large lots to the
east and west, while the land to the north is vacant wooded property. The property to
the south is vacant wooded land zoned AF, Agricultural and Forestry. A barbershop at
the northeast corner of Kanis and Denny Roads is zoned C-3 General Commercial. A
plant nursery at the southwest corner of Kanis and Stewart Road is zoned C-3. A
church is located on the south side of Kanis Road between the intersections of Denny
and Stewart Roads.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On April 17, 2001, multiple changes were made from Single Family, Multifamily, and
Park / Open Space to Community Shopping on the west side of Chenal Parkway at
Rahling Road about 8/10 of a mile northeast of the applicant’s property to accommodate
proposed development.
On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Office to Commercial on Chenal Parkway
east of Kirk Road about 1 mile east of the property in question to accommodate
proposed development.
The applicant’s property, as well as all of the immediately surrounding property, is
shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. The property at the intersections
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-02
2
of Kanis with Denny and Stewart Roads is shown as Neighborhood Commercial, with a
small area shown as Public Institutional on the south side of Kanis between the
intersections of Denny and Stewart Roads.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Kanis Road is shown as Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan with a Class III
bikeway from Chenal Parkway to the western planning boundary. Since Kanis Road is
built as a rural two-lane road, half street improvements would be needed to improve the
road to Master Street Plan standards. The Class III bikeway would not require any
additional paving or right-of-way.
Denny and Stewart Roads are also shown as Minor Arterials which are currently built as
rural two lane roads. A Class III Bikeway is shown on Denny Road from Ferndale
Cutoff Road to Kanis Road. A Proposed Principal Arterial known as the West Loop is
shown to link Chenal Parkway to the I-30 interchange. However, the exact route of the
proposed West Loop is undetermined at this time.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the applicant’s
property is located south of a strip of land shown as a Potential Recreational
Opportunity along the banks of Rock Creek. The applicant’s property is separated from
the strip of land shown as a Potential Recreational Opportunity by a ridge. Access
would need to be provided to link properties located in the application area with any
Parks and Recreation development of the land shown as a Potential Recreational
Opportunity.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock
recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant’s property is located in a rural area outside city limits east of a commercial
node that has the potential to expand due the close proximity of two Minor Arterials
intersecting with Kanis Road. In addition, the status of Kanis Road as a minor arterial
will bring pressure for future non-residential development along Kanis Road. The non-
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-02
3
residential development along this section of Kanis Road should be concentrated at
intersections of arterial streets as currently shown on the Future Land Use Plan.
This amendment would place office development in the middle of an area shown as
Single Family that is isolated from the areas set aside for non-residential uses and
therefore could not serve as a buffer between intensities of land use. The area shown
as Neighborhood Commercial at the intersections of Kanis with Denny and Stewart
Roads contains a little over 3 + acres of vacant land available for non-residential
development. The area shown as Commercial at the intersection of Kanis and
Edswood Road contains about 12 + acres of land available for non-residential uses.
The applicant’s property is located about ¼ of a mile from the nearest land available for
non-residential uses in the area. In addition there is vacant land available for office
development along Chenal Parkway.
For this area to develop, infrastructure will need to be developed. The streets shown as
Minor Arterial are currently not built to handle the required traffic count of 18,000
vehicles a day. Drainage facilities would need improvement to handle increased storm
run-off resulting from new development. Utilities would also need improvements to
accommodate future developments. The West Loop, shown as a Proposed Principal
Arterial, would require enough right-of-way to handle a traffic count of 25,000 vehicles
per day. Although the Master Street Plan map shows the proposed route of the West
Loop as located in the vicinity of Edswood Road, the exact location has not been
determined and could be located closer to the applicant’s property.
Any non-residential development of this site needs to be compatible with the
surrounding residential properties. If this amendment were approved, the Planned
Zoning Development process would govern the development of the applicant’s property.
If the proposed development has design characteristics similar to residential properties,
potential negative impacts from non-residential development would be minimized. The
development of the property should be small scale in size dimensions and avoid the
mass and bulk typical of office developments that are incompatible with neighboring
residential uses.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Gibraltar/Pt.
West/Timber Ridge, Parkway Place Property Owners Association, and Spring Valley
Manor Property Owners Association. Staff has received two comments from area
residents. The one comment was opposed and one neutral.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. A change to Suburban Office would be
premature at this time.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-02
4
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was made to
wave the by-laws for a five-day notice prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That
motion was made and approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. A motion
was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 4.1 FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
NAME: ESG Short-form POD
LOCATION: 18425 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
ESG – Engineered Systems Group
32 Montvale Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
ENGINEER:
Marlar Engineering Company
5318 John F. Kennedy Boulevard
North Little Rock, AR 72116
AREA: 1.4 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: Office - General and Professional Office Uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
A request was to be heard by the Little Rock Planning Commission on May 3, 2001 for
the rezoning of the site from R-2, Single-family to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial. The
previous applicant withdrew his request prior to the public hearing.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the rezoning of this 1.4 acre site located at 18425 Kanis
Road to Planned Office Development (POD). The applicant is requesting the site
be rezoned to allow the site to develop with general and professional office uses.
A Land Use Plan amendment has been filed as a separate item on this agenda
(Item No. 4 File No. LU03-18-02).
The applicant proposes the placement of three (3) structures on the site in three
Phases. The first phase will consist of the construction of a small office that is
approximately 1000 square feet. Additional structures will be placed as indicated
on the site plan. Phase II will consist of a second structure of approximately
1000 square feet and Phase III will consist of a third building with approximately
3500 square feet. The applicant has indicated a ten year phasing plan.
The applicant has indicated the structures will be aesthetically pleasing; the
architectural style will be more residential than commercial in design. The
applicant has also indicated there will be few employees in the Phase I building.
The applicant has stated there are three employees and expects very little traffic
to the site since most of the activity takes place off site at the customers place of
business. The applicant has stated the Phase II and III buildings will be
marketed to similar type uses; low volume traffic generators. The applicant is
requesting general and professional office users for these buildings.
The hours of operation proposed are from 7:00 am to 5:30 pm Monday through
Friday. The applicant has indicated the parking will be phased with the building
construction. The applicant has also indicated there will be no signage except for
wall signage on each of the buildings.
The applicant is requesting a deferral of street improvements to Kanis Road until
Phase III or ten years. The applicant has indicated right-of-way will be dedicated
as required per the Master Street Plan. The proposed site plan also includes
landscaping as required by the Landscape Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant site with a scattering of trees. There are single-family homes
located to the east and west of the site as well as non-residential uses. The area
located at the intersection of Kanis Road and Denny Road and along Denny
Road to the intersection with Stewart Road contains a number of non-residential
uses.
There is a large church and an old store building currently being used as a
beauty shop and a resale shop (zoned C-1) located west of the site. To the east
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
3
of the proposed site is a commercial use (zoned C-3) currently being used as an
automobile repair business with a portion of the building being used as a daycare
and uniform shop.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from a
neighbor. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified
of the Public Hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in
the area.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with the
planned development. An in-lieu payment is acceptable.
3. Driveways shall conform to Section 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. Re-locate
the driveway to the center of the property.
4. Ditch crossing must be engineered according to City Drainage Manual.
5. Set finished floor elevations by professional engineer.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater Outside the service area, no comment. Contact the Pulaski County
Sanitarian for details concerning wastewater collection and treatment for the site and
obtain a preliminary approval of the desired system.
Entergy: No comment.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: SBC requests a ten-foot utility easement along the east and west property
lines. Contact SBC at 373-5112 (Charles McDonald) for additional details.
Central Arkansas Water: Water service is not available to this property at this time.
A water main extension will be required. This property could possibly be served off
the proposed WID 349 (W Kanis & Denny Roads).
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Maintain a 20-foot wide drive to
Phase 3. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
4
County Planning:
1. Existing Restrictions (Original Bill of Assurance).
2. Provide a drainage plan.
3. Provide certification or approval by the Fire District to serve the
development.
4. Elevation datum and source.
5. A 40 foot building line is required.
6. A state clearing permit will be required.
7. Provide the source of water supply.
8. Provide the source of wastewater disposal.
9. Provide an erosion control plan.
10. Provide a vicinity map on the proposed site plan.
11. Provide the basis of bearings.
12. Provide state plane coordinates and datum.
13. The site must be replatted into a single-lot.
14. Provide the name and address of the owner on the proposed site plan.
15. Provide the name and address of the developer on the proposed site plan.
16. Provide monument size and type.
17. Describe area to be dedicated.
18. Show adjoining subdivided lots.
19. Show owners of unplatted lands adjoining the site.
20. Provide the type of construction for buildings and accessories.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request lies in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied
for a Planned Office Development for general and professional offices.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item
on this agenda (Item No. 4 File No. LU03-18-02).
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: The proposed parking lot nearest to Kanis Road does not allow for
the required twelve (12) foot wide minimum on-site street buffer. The average
street buffer width required is twenty-four (24) feet.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
5
A total of eight (8) percent of interior of parking areas containing twelve (12) or
more parking spaces must be landscaped with interior landscaping islands of at
least 150 square in area and 7 ½ feet in width.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
eastern and western perimeters of the site.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees
as feasible on this site. Extra credit toward fulfilling landscaping ordinance
requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper
or larger.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff noted the request was
located in the extraterritorial planning jurisdiction near the Kanis and Denny Road
intersection. Staff stated the request was to rezone the site to Planned Office
Development to allow three office buildings to be constructed in three phases.
Staff stated there were additional items, which should be included on the
proposed site plan. Staff stated the applicant had not provided a striping plan on
the proposed site plan. Staff stated the striping plan was required to allow a
determination of the available parking for the site. Staff also stated the applicant
had not provided details concerning signage. Staff requested the applicant
indicate on the site plan the location of any proposed signage along with the
details of the sign including the height and sign area. Staff also questioned if
there would be a dumpster located on the site and requested the applicant
indicate the location on the proposed site plan. Staff also requested the
applicant provide an estimated time frame for construction of the phases.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted Kanis Road was classified
on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial and dedication of right-of-way
45-feet from the centerline would be required. Staff also noted the driveways
should be located near the center of the property to conform to ordinance
requirements.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant had not
included the required street buffer on the proposed site plan. Staff stated the
applicant would be required to allow a twelve foot wide minimum buffer along the
street with an average width of twenty four feet. Staff also noted the applicant
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
6
would be required to screen the areas to the east and west since the area was
zoned residentially. Staff noted the City Beautiful Commission recommended
preserving as many existing on-site trees as feasible. Staff stated the applicant
would be given extra credit toward fulfilling the landscape ordinance
requirements if trees were properly preserved.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to Staff on July 9, 2003. The
applicant has indicated a parking plan with four spaces shown on the plan. The
applicant has indicated the parking will be constructed so that when the second
building is constructed parking may be extended. The applicant has indicated
landscaping along the parking perimeters and proposes a land use buffer along
the eastern and western perimeters. The applicant has indicated the screening
will be evergreen shrubs along these property lines.
The applicant has indicated there will not an on-site dumpster. The applicant has
indicated the development will be constructed in three phases. The first phase
will be the construction of a 1000 square foot of building area and associated
parking (four spaces). The second phase will also include construction of 1000
square feet of building area and four parking spaces and the third phase will be
the construction of 3500 square feet of building area and eight parking spaces.
The applicant has indicated parking will be provided per the zoning ordinance or
1 space per 400 square feet of gross floor area. The applicant has indicated
Phase II will be constructed in 3 – 5 years and Phase III will be constructed in 5 –
10 years. Staff is supportive of the phasing plan and the proposed parking plan.
The applicant has relocated the driveway to the center of the property as
requested by Public Works staff. The applicant has also indicated dedication of
right-of-way 45-feet from centerline as required by the Master Street Plan. The
applicant is requesting a deferral of the street improvements until Phase III or for
then years. Staff is supportive of this request.
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am
to 5:30 pm Monday through Friday. Staff does not feel the proposed hours of
operation will be intrusive to the residents located in the area.
The applicant has indicated the building design will be compatible both in scale
and architecture to a single-family home. Staff is supportive of the requested
architectural design and feels if constructed as indicated the building construction
would blend with the surrounding area.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-A
7
The applicant has not requested signage as a part of the development. Staff
would recommend signage be allowed per the zoning ordinance for signage
allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square
feet in area. Staff recommends the site be limited to one ground-mounted sign.
The applicant has indicated there is not a bill of assurance in place for the
proposed property.
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning. To Staff’s knowledge there are no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the
landscaping, the architectural design and the hours of operation will blend with
the uses in the area and should have minimal, if any, negative impact.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends signage be allowed per the zoning ordinance for office
signage or maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The
site is limited to one ground-mounted sign.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant’s were present representing the request. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated to their knowledge, there were no outstanding issues related to the
request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Staff presented a recommendation that any signage on the site be limited to signage
allowed in office zones or a maximum of six (6) feet in height and sixty-four (64) square
feet in area.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-7432
NAME: Houston Electric Company Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: 1904 West 2nd Street
DEVELOPER:
Houston Electric Company
1904 West 3rd Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 0.13 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Commercial parking lot.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone a single lot to PD-C to allow the owner to
upgrade and improve an existing parking lot. The lot adjoins 1904 West 2nd
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7432
2
Street and is zoned R-3, Single-family and is currently being used as a
commercial parking lot. Currently no access is being taken or is contemplated
from West 2nd Street.
The applicant is also requesting the closure of the portion of alley that adjoins the
lot (Lot 6 Block 6 Union Depot Addition).
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently being used by Gary Houston Electric Company as a parking
lot. There is a vacant boarded single-family home located to the west of the site
and a recently approved PD-C for a beauty salon located further west at the
intersection of West 2nd Street and Battery Street. The area to the north of the
site continues to serve as single-family and two family dwellings. The area to the
south of the site faces West 3rd Street and contains non-residential uses both
commercial and office. Across West 3rd Street, is the State Capitol complex.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Capitol View/Stifft Station Neighborhood Association along with all owners of
property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be
identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e).
Show any steep cuts or fills greater than 3:1.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Service to Lot 4 is in the alley. A 2-inch water main in the
alley goes across Lot 5 and area that is gated off. This area must be retained as a
utility easement. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7432
3
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a single lot commercial
parking lot.
The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which
would necessitate a Plan Amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in an
area covered by the Capitol View / Stifft Station Neighborhood Action Plan. The
plan does not contain any goals, objectives, or action statements relevant to this
case.
Landscape: Proposed areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements. This takes into account the reductions allowed within
the designated mature area and for rehabilitation of an existing site.
Unless otherwise provided for, a six (6) foot high screen is required along the
eastern and western perimeters of the site. However, this screen may be
deemed inappropriate.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was for a single-lot
located south of West 2nd Street. Staff stated the site was currently being used
by Gary Houston Electric Company as a commercial parking lot and the request
was to zone the site to PD-C to allow the use to become a conforming use. Staff
stated the request also included the abandonment of a portion of alleyway, which
adjoined the property. Staff stated the alley to the east had already been
abandoned.
Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water indicating the area of the
alley must be retained as a utility easement. Landscape comments were
addressed. Staff stated the area was located in the designated mature area and
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7432
4
reductions in required landscaping were allowed. Staff noted a six foot high
screen would be required along the eastern and western perimeters of the site.
Staff noted the screen may be deemed inappropriate since the site was located
in an area which was functioning as non-residential to the east and there was a
vacant boarded single-family home to the west of the site.
Staff stated they would contact Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick
Engineers to discuss the comments and try to resolve any issues prior to the
Public Hearing. There being no further items for discussion. The Committee
then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated
screening will be placed along the eastern and western perimeters of the
proposed parking area with a dense planting of evergreen shrubs. The applicant
has also indicated the alleyway would be retained as a utility easement as
requested by the utility companies.
The site is an existing parking lot for Gary Houston Electric Company. The use
has been in existence for a number of years and staff does not see any problems
with the use continuing. The applicant has indicated there is not a valid Bill of
Assurance for the subdivision.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to rezone the single lot to
PD-C to allow an existing parking lot to become a legal conforming use.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the
request. There were no objectors present. Staff stated to their knowledge there are no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff stated the request was
to rezone a single lot to PD-C to allow an existing parking lot to become a legal
conforming use.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7432
5
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-7433
NAME: Malmstrom Short-form POD
LOCATION: On the northwest corner of Kanis Road and Autumn Road
DEVELOPER:
Malmstrom Family LLC
11610 Kanis Road
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
Blaylock Threet Engineers Inc.
1501 Market Street
Little Rock, AR 72211
AREA: 2.78 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family and O-3, General Office
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential and General Office
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: O-3, General Office Uses along with the ten percent allowable
accessory uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The site consist of three tracts of the Montclair Subdivision currently zoned O-3
and a portion of a fourth tract zoned as R-2. The applicant is requesting to
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433
2
rezone the area to Planned Office Development (POD) and to replat the
properties as a single tract for an office development and leave the remainder of
the fourth tract as a separate lot. The result will be the creation of a two lot plat
as well as the rezoning to POD. Neither of the lots will require waivers or
variances.
The applicant has indicated the development will be developed in four phases.
The applicant is proposing the construction of approximately 7500 square feet of
office space in each of the first three phases and 8100 square feet of office
space in the fourth phase.
The requested uses include those allowed in O-3, General Office District and the
10% accessory uses permitted in O-3, General Office District. The applicant has
indicated the ancillary space will be an aggregate square footage throughout the
site based on a fully completed master plan. The hours of operation are
proposed from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Friday.
The applicant has indicated the building height will not exceed 35-feet allowed
under the O-3 zoning classification. The applicant has indicated stormwater
detention will be a detention pond in the first two phases. However, upon final
construction of the project, an underground detention system will be
implemented.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing office building with a single-family home located on
the western portion of the site. The area to the north of the site contains an office
building with Pinnacle Point Hospital further north. To the east of the site is a
vacant non-conforming office building and Kid’s Sport (zoned POD) is located to
the northeast of the site both fronting onto Autumn Road. The uses to the south
include office and commercial uses. There is a large tract of O-3 zoned property
located to the southwest near the Kanis/Bowman Road intersection.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge and the Birchwood Neighborhood
Associations along with all property owners located within 200 feet of the site and
all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were
notified of the Public Hearing.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Autumn Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street.
Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
3. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan).
Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with the planned development. Autumn Road must be 18 feet
from centerline. Kanis Road requires an in-lieu payment and engineer’s
estimate. Autumn Road may be built in phases: the first phase, now; the
second concurrent with Phase 4 project construction.
4. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding streetlight requirements.
5. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Conform with
maximum grades in Section 31-210.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7. Due to future grade changes to Kanis Road, any work on Autumn Road
near the intersection with Kanis Road may be subject to future demolition.
8. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection.
9. Direction of flow for watercourses leaving the property, needs to be shown.
10. A Grading Permit will be required per Section 29-186 (c) and (d).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this
site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire protection facilities will
be required. If additional water facilities are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will
apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off a private fire
system. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433
4
Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer.
All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water
service must be met. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection. This development will have minor impact on existing
water distribution system. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for
additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Office Development for a phased development of four
office buildings.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Birchwood - Walnut Valley Neighborhood Action Plan. The
plan does not contain any goals, objectives, or action statements relevant to this
case.
Landscape: Interior landscape islands must be at least 7 ½ feet in width to
receive credit toward fulfilling interior landscaping requirements.
A small section of the proposed southwestern structure projects over into the
minimum nine (9) foot wide land use buffer required along the western perimeter.
The full width requirement without transfers being 13.2 feet.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
western perimeter of the site. Credit toward fulfilling screening requirements can
be given if the western perimeter of the two proposed western structures has no
windows or doors other than those required for safety.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide approved
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433
5
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be
given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff briefly described the project to the
Subdivision Committee members stating the request was a rezoning request to
POD to allow the construction of four office buildings in four phases. Staff stated
the site currently contained an existing office building and a single-family home.
Staff stated the applicant would be required to provide additional information with
regard to building square footages and the maximum building height. Staff also
noted if there would be a dumpster located on the site the location would be
required on the site plan. Staff stated details concerning signage and fencing, if
any were proposed, would also be required on the site plan.
Public Works comments were discussed with the Committee. There was a
general discussion concerning the road improvements to Kanis Road and
Autumn Road. Staff noted the comment, which indicated staff would support a
phasing plan for the street construction. Staff also noted the intersection of
Autumn and Kanis Roads would more than likely be redesigned once the
widening of Kanis Road was completed.
Landscaping comments were addressed with the Committee. Staff stated the
applicant would be required to install a screen on the western perimeter either a
wood fence, wall or dense evergreen plantings to screen the adjacent single-
family zoned property. Staff also stated an irrigation system would be required to
water landscaped area. Staff noted interior islands of the parking lot were
required to be seven and one-half feet in area to count towards fulfilling the
landscape ordinance requirements.
Staff stated they would contact the applicant and try to resolve as many issues
as possible prior to the Public Hearing. There being no further items for
discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The bill of assurance
submitted refers solely to the use of an access easement and roadway
dedications. The applicant has indicated the signage will be located near the
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433
6
Autumn/Kanis Road intersection. The proposed signage is six feet in height and
sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage and
placement.
The applicant has indicated the maximum building height to be 35-feet and the
days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through
Friday. The applicant has also indicated right-of-way dedication will be made to
the City per the Master Street Plan. The applicant has requested the road
improvements be phased with the building construction as indicated by Public
Works. Staff is supportive of the requested phasing plan.
The applicant is proposing the placement of 52 parking spaces and the
construction of 7500 square feet of office space in Phase I. The typical minimum
parking required for a 7500 square foot office building would be 18 spaces. The
proposed parking should be more than sufficient to meet the typical minimum
parking demand. In Phase II, a 7500 square foot office building and 27 parking
spaces are proposed. In Phase III, 7500 square feet of office and 15 parking
spaces are proposed and in Phase IV, 8100 square feet of office space and 27
parking spaces. The overall development will be maintained under a single
ownership and has sufficient parking to meet the typical minimum parking
demand.
The applicant has addressed the landscaping issues as requested. The
applicant has indicated landscape islands and proposed a six-foot high wood
fence along the western property line. The applicant is not proposing screening
along the eastern perimeter. The development abuts Autumn Road and across
Autumn Road, although zoned residentially, are non-residential uses. Staff
supports the screening as proposed.
The applicant has requested uses be allowed as those allowed under the O-3,
General Office zoning classification. The applicant has also requested the ten
percent accessory uses. The applicant has requested the accessory uses to be
an aggregate square footage based on a fully completed master plan. Staff is
supportive of the O-3, General Office zoning classification uses as allowable
uses for the site and staff is supportive of the ten percent accessory uses for the
site. Staff is not however supportive of the applicant’s proposed distribution of
the accessory space. Staff would recommend the ten percent ancillary
commercial space be limited to ten percent of each building. This would limit the
commercial uses to approximately seven hundred fifty square feet in each of the
first three buildings and eight hundred ten square feet in the fourth building. If
the proposed development is allowed an aggregate, the commercial user could
occupy approximately 3060 square feet of a single building. With the distribution
proposed by staff, this would limit the commercial space on the site and not allow
a large-scale commercial development to locate on the site.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433
7
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The use is consistent with the future land use plan and
should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhoods.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the ten percent accessory use space be limited to ten percent
of each building.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no objectors present.
Staff stated to their knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff stated the use was consistent with the future land use plan
and should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhoods.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Staff also recommended the ten percent accessory use space be limited to ten percent
of each building.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-6323-G
NAME: Lot 12 the Village at Rahling Road Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Rahling Circle (Unrecorded Lot 12)
DEVELOPER:
Central Arkansas Library System
100 Rock Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.5 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: C-2 Permitted uses
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On August 5, 1997, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,542 which
established The Village at Rahling Road Long-form PCD. The PCD established a 14-lot
development with C-2 uses being permitted. The initial action approved a site plan for
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-G
2
Lots 1 and 2 of the development with the intent being that each of the remaining lots
would be brought to the Commission on an individual basis as a particular development
was proposed. Subsequent actions have been approved to allow five small buildings on
the properties immediately west of the site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Central Arkansas Library System is planning the construction of the new
Roosevelt L. Thompson Public Library on an unrecorded lot (Lot 12) in the
Village at Rahling Road Subdivision. The building is proposed as a single story
building containing 12,500 square feet and a proposed 3575 square foot addition.
The applicant is proposing the placement of 36 on-site parking spaces. In
addition, there is street parking and an adjacent public lot, which will provide
additional parking. A drive-up book drop is provided in the on-site parking area.
The hours of operation are proposed as 10:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through
Saturday with the facility remaining open until 8:00 pm two nights per week.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a cleared flat site with street improvements in place. The property
was cleared and graded with initial development of the PCD. Access to the lot is
via Rahling Circle, off of Rahling Road. The O-2 and PCD zoned properties
immediately south and east of the site are undeveloped. Smaller office buildings
are located adjacent to the proposed site to the south and southwest. The larger
buildings of the multiuse PCD are located northwest of the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could
be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public
Hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Maximum grade
shall comply to Section 31-210.
2. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-G
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: Provide a 15-foot easement for overhead facilities along the perimeter of
the site. A 15-foot easement will also be required when Lot 11 and Lot 13 develop.
Contact Entergy at 954-5165 for additional details.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. The Little Rock Fire Department
needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire
hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be
installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438
for additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Community Shopping for this property. The applicant has
applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial Development for a
public library.
The uses proposed with the Planned Commercial Development are of a public -
quasi-public nature. Therefore, as with all Public Institutional uses a Land Use
Plan amendment is not required.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: A portion of the width of the proposed on-site street buffer drops
below the nine (9) foot minimum. The full requirement without transfers being
seventeen (17) feet in width.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-G
4
An irrigation system to water landscape areas will be required.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
application. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development
indicating Central Arkansas Library System was considering the construction of a
branch library on the site. Staff requested the applicant provide details
concerning the signage and dumpster location on the proposed site plan. Staff
also noted that any additional site lighting must be low level lighting and
directional, directed away from residentially zoned properties.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the stormwater detention
ordinance would apply to the site. Staff also stated any sidewalk damaged in the
public right-of-way would be required to be repaired prior to occupancy.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the proposed width of the
on-site street buffer dropped below the nine foot minimum. Staff stated the full
width requirement would be seventeen feet.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has indicated the
site will be utilized as a Central Arkansas Library as a branch library. The
typically minimum parking required would be 43 parking spaces. There are 31
spaces proposed as a part of the development with a large parking area across
the street, which should provide sufficient parking, if parking were to ever
become an issue for the site.
The revised plan indicated a portion of the on-site street buffer still appears to
drop below the minimum nine-foot minimum. Staff would recommend the
applicant increase the street buffer to the nine-foot minimum by shifting the
building to the east the few feet necessary to meet this minimum.
The applicant has indicated water will be extended to the site by the developer as
required by Central Arkansas Water. The applicant has indicated the site will
utilize city service for garbage collection and there will not be a dumpster located
on the site.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-G
5
The applicant has indicated signage will comply with the Zoning Ordinance and
the Chenal Design criteria. The proposed signage is 12‘-4” by 1’-4” by 4’-9 3/16”
and will be a ground mounted pedestal sign. The typical signage allowed in
office zones would not to exceed six (6) feet in height and 64 square feet in area.
The proposed signage complies with that allowed in office zones.
The applicant has indicated Lot 12 will be final platted prior to development. This
is similar to the previous proposals and the development pattern in the area.
The hours of operation are proposed as 10:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through
Saturday with the facility remaining open until 8:00 pm two nights per week. The
proposed use and hours of operation is consistent with the development pattern
in the area and should have no adverse impact on the surrounding area.
Staff is supportive of the request to revise the previously approved PCD to allow
Central Arkansas Library to construct a new 13,724 square foot building and the
proposed 3,575 square foot addition on unrecorded Lot 12. The area is
developing as non-residential neighborhood commercial and office type uses.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed development. Staff recommends approval of the requested revision to
the planned development to allow unrecorded Lot 12 to develop as a branch
library.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed revision to the PCD for unrecorded
Lot 12 subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D, E and
F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the
requested revision to the planned commercial development to allow unrecorded Lot 12
to develop as a branch library for Central Arkansas Library System subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-7343
NAME: Splash Carwash on Bowman Road Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: On South Bowman Road approximately 850 feet south of Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
Dickson Flake Partners
P.O. Box 3546
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 2.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Carwash
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the construction of a two bay automatic carwash on the
site and the placement of an island containing two vacuum stations. The
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7343
2
applicant is proposing the building to be approximately 2500 square feet and the
building materials are proposed as concrete block and glazed block. The
applicant has indicated the veneer of the buildings to be EIFS and simulated
stone. The roof system is wood truss on 7/12 pitch with OSB decking and
simulated slate shingles. The maximum building height proposed is 23 feet.
The hours of operation are proposed as twenty-four hours per day and seven
days per week.
The applicant has indicated right-of-way dedication along with half street
improvements to minor arterial street standards will be provided. The applicant is
proposing the placement of a single-entry drive near the center of the site.
The applicant is proposing the placement a single pylon sign near the northern
boundary of the site near Bowman Road. The applicant has indicated the
signage will be consistent with signage allowed in commercial zones.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains a vacant single-family structure located in the mid-section of
the site. There are single-family homes located to the north and south of this site
very close to the property lines. The ice skating arena is located to the east of
the site and a commercial development with multiple uses is located to the north
of the adjoining single-family home. To the southeast of the site is a large
office/warehouse development adjoining vacant O-3 zoned property. The
proposed development site is very deep, abutting the Cherry Creek Subdivision
to the west.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
John Barrow Neighborhood Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber
Ridge Neighborhood Association along with all owners of property located within
200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300
feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Bowman Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvements to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with the
planned development.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7343
3
3. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding streetlight requirements.
4. Driveways shall conform to Section 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. Relocated
the driveway to the center of the property.
5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6. A Grading Permit will be required per Section 29-186 (c) and (d).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Not enough information submitted to locate property. No comment at
this time. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Can not determine location by information given. If any
existing gas lines are located on the property, Center-Point Energy will require
easements. Contact Center-Point Energy at 377-4539 for additional details.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based
on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges for
new meter(s) or increased meter size. Due to the nature of the processes used in
this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer
assembly, installed before the first outlet, will be required on the domestic water
service. The Little Rock Fire Department may require an additional public fire
hydrant in conjunction with this development. The fire hydrant could be installed by
Central Arkansas Water's forces at Developer's expense, but would need to be
coordinated with the contractor for this project. Contact Central Arkansas Water at
992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Service Trades District for this property. The
applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a car wash.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7343
4
The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which
would necessitate a Plan Amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: Portions of the widths of the proposed land use buffers along both
the northern and southern perimeters drop below the nine (9) foot minimums
allowed.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either wooden fence with its face side directed
outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required north and south of this
development.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposed
development was for a carwash to be located on South Bowman Road. Staff
noted there were additional items needed to be shown on the proposed site plan.
Staff questioned if the vacuum islands would be covered and requested the
details (height/construction material) if a cover was proposed.
Staff requested the applicant move the vacuum island to the rear of the site away
from the existing single-family structures. Mr. White stated he felt the area would
not remain residential. Staff stated they agreed with Mr. White’s assessment but
there were currently homes located on each side of the site. Staff stated the
residents should not be forced to endure the noise of the vacuums prior to the
redevelopment and while the structures remained residential.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant would be
required to dedicate right-of-way on Bowman Road and to construct the street to
Master Street Plan standard. Staff stated the driveway should be relocated to
the center of the property as required by ordinance.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted if existing trees on the site
were properly preserved extra credit could be given toward fulfilling the
requirements of the landscape ordinance. Staff also noted the southern and
northern perimeters dropped below the nine foot minimum allowed.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7343
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has relocated
the vacuum islands to the rear away from the single-family homes. The applicant
has also relocated the driveway to the center of the property as requested by
staff.
The applicant has stated there will not be a canopy over the vacuum islands.
The applicant has also indicated the site is not covered under a bill of assurance.
The applicant has requested signage per the zoning ordinance for signage
allowed in commercial zones. The applicant is requesting a maximum of thirty-
six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area. Staff is supportive of
the requested signage.
The applicant has indicated screening will be placed along the northern and
southern perimeters. The applicant has also increased the minimum landscape
strip to ten feet along the northern perimeter and twelve feet along the southern
perimeter. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping.
The proposed development is located in an area of transition. The site is shown
as Service Trades District on the City’s Future Land Use plan which would allow
for a mixture of office, warehousing and industrial park activities. The
development requires a planned zoning district when not wholly office.
A carwash facility is not considered an industrial use. The use appears to be
less intensive than is allowed in the Service Trades District category. The
applicant has applied for a planned commercial development to allow the
construction of the carwash facility as required by the Service Trades District
category.
The applicant has also moved the facility to the front of the property thus allowing
for the rear yard area to remain in its natural state. The area to the west is the
Cherry Creek Subdivision and will more than likely remain residential for a very
long time in the future. Staff feels it appropriate to buffer this subdivision as
much as possible to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood.
Staff is supportive of the request. The site will have 24-hour access and the
possibility of activity on the site at all times. This should be minimized by the
applicant placing the vacuum islands in the rear of the development portion of the
site and the applicant has indicated the new dryers for the carwash have a lower
decibel level.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7343
6
Staff feels the applicant has done a good job in minimizing the negative impacts
to the surrounding area and if developed should have limited impact on the area.
With the exception of the homes located on either side of the proposed
development the remainder of the area has developed and redeveloped with
non-residential uses. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter on
July 17, 2003 requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff stated they
were supportive of the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-7435
NAME: Splash Carwash on Kanis Road Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: 15823 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
Dickson Flake Partners
P.O. Box 3546
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.04 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Carwash
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the construction of a two bay automatic carwash on the
site and the placement of an island containing five vacuum stations. The
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
2
applicant is proposing the building to be approximately 2500 square feet and the
building materials are proposed as concrete block and glazed block. The
applicant has indicated the veneer of the buildings to be EIFS and simulated
stone. The roof system is wood truss on 7/12 pitch with OSB decking and
simulated slate shingles. The maximum building height proposed is 23 feet.
The hours of operation are proposed as twenty-four hours per day and seven
days per week.
The applicant has indicated right-of-way dedication along with half street
improvements to collector street standards will be provided. The applicant is
proposing the placement of a single-entry drive on the south side of the site. The
applicant is proposing the placement a single pylon sign near the northern
boundary of the site near Kanis Road.
The site is located outside the city limits but within the city’s extraterritorial
planning jurisdiction. The applicant has proposed, should the Commission
recommend approval of the request, the owner would then seek annexation to
allow the development to tie into city sewer, which is located just south of the
owner’s property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located adjacent to a creek running along the southern and western
property lines. The site contains an existing single-family residence, a storage
building and several very significant trees. The Kroger development borders the
site to the west and the One Source development is located to the east across
Kanis Road. Other uses in the area include a PCD for Chenal Gardens located
southeast of the site along Kanis Road and a vacant C-3 zoned piece of property
located at the Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway intersection. Kinco Construction
Company is located adjacent to One Source fronting on Chenal Parkway with a
secondary access to Kanis Road.
Street improvements have been installed along Kanis Road adjoining the Kroger
development and stop at the northern property line of this site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an
adjoining property owner. The Parkway Place Neighborhood Association along
with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents,
who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the
Public Hearing.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan).
Construct one-half street improvement to the streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with the planned development.
2. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Comply with
maximum grade requirements in Section 31-210.
3. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding streetlight requirements.
4. Street Improvement Plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. Stripe left
turn at north end of property.
5. A grading permit and development permit for special flood hazard area is
required prior to construction.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7. Finish floor elevation must be set by professional engineer.
8. Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are required.
9. Wash water is not permitted into the stormdrain system.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service area. No comment. If the property is annexed into
the City of Little Rock sewer service is available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based
on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges for
new meter(s) or increased meter size. Due to the nature of the processes used in
this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer
assembly, installed before the first outlet, will be required on the domestic water
service. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
4
County Planning:
1. Provide any existing restrictions (original bill of assurance).
2. Provide a drainage plan.
3. Provide a certification or approval by the fire district to serve the
development.
4. Provide elevation datum and source.
5. Provide a 40 foot building line.
6. Show the 100-year floodplain line and elevation on the site plan.
7. Show the minimum finished floor elevation for buildings and equipment
room.
8. Provide the state flood zone north of the creek.
9. Provide paving details.
10. A state clearing permit will be required.
11. A floodplain development permit will be required.
12. Provide the source of water supply on the site plan.
13. Provide the means of wastewater disposal on the site plan.
14. Provide the erosion control plan.
15. Provide a vicinity map on the site plan.
16. Remove or flood proof existing storage within the floodway.
17. Define property lines / lot lines and dimensions.
18. Provide the basis of bearings.
19. Provide state plane coordinates and datum.
20. Replat the development into a single lot.
21. Provide a legend of symbols.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial and Park / Open Space for
this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development
for a car wash.
The request is consistent with the Planned Zoning Development part of Mixed
Office Commercial. A portion of the applicant’s property is in the floodway for
Rock Creek but will remain undeveloped.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
5
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposed
development was for a carwash to be located on Kanis Road near the
intersection with Chenal Parkway and adjacent to a floodway. Staff noted there
were additional items needed to be shown on the proposed site plan. Staff
questioned if the vacuum islands would be covered and requested the details
(height/construction material) if a cover was proposed.
Staff noted the proposed development was located outside the city limits. Staff
stated the city would not extend sewer service outside the city limits. Mr. White
stated he would contact the owner and decide how to proceed. Staff stated the
containment of the waste from the carwash would need to be resolved either
through annexation or approval from the Health Department prior to construction.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant would be
required to dedicate right-of-way on Kanis Road and to construct the street to
Master Street Plan standard. Staff stated the driveway should be relocated to
the center of the property as required by ordinance.
Staff noted comments from County Planning. Staff suggested Mr. White contact
the County Planning Department for further clarification of their requirements.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted if existing trees on the site
were properly preserved, extra credit could be given toward fulfilling the
requirements of the landscape ordinance. Staff also noted areas set aside for
buffers appeared to meet with ordinance requirements.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has stated there
will not be a canopy over the vacuum islands. The applicant has also indicated
the site is not covered under a bill of assurance.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
6
The applicant has requested signage per the zoning ordinance for signage
allowed in commercial zones. The applicant is requesting a maximum of thirty-
six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area. Staff is supportive of
the requested signage.
The proposed landscaping plan appears to meet with the minimum ordinance
requirements. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping plan as submitted.
The proposed development is located in an area of transition. The site is shown
as Mixed Office Commercial on the City’s Future Land Use plan, which would
allow for a mixture of office and commercial uses. The area is developing
primarily with non-residential uses with the Kroger development located to the
north and west of the site and One Source located to the east. The site is
located adjacent to a floodway, which is shown as Park/Open Space on the
City’s Future Land Use Plan. The applicant does not intend to develop in the
floodway and the proposed development will not affect this land use designation.
Staff is supportive of the request. The site will have 24-hour access and the
possibility of activity on the site at all times. Adverse impacts should be
minimized by the location of the carwash facility. There are not any single-family
homes located in close proximity to the proposed facility.
The only unresolved issue related to the site is the availability of sewer. With the
site not being located within the city limits, the applicant will not be allowed to
connect to the city sewer system. Staff would recommend the applicant apply to
the County for annexation prior to the rezoning request being forwarded to the
Board of Directors. If the applicant elects not to annex to the City, then he will be
required to submit to staff an approved septic disposal plan from the Arkansas
Department of Health prior to submission to the Board of Directors.
Staff feels the applicant has done a good job in minimizing the negative impacts
to the surrounding area and if developed should have limited impact on the area.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the applicant apply to the County for annexation to the City of
Little Rock or furnish staff with an approved septic system from the Arkansas
Department of Health.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs
D, E and F of the above report.
Staff also stated the request was located outside the city limits and stated as a part of
the recommendation the applicant would be required to apply to the County for
annexation to the City of Little Rock or furnish staff with an approved septic system from
the Arkansas Department of Health.
Mr. Stephen Giles representing the applicant spoke in opposition of the proposed
development. He stated he was representing the owners of the Kroger Development
located to the north. He indicated the proposed street design did not meet the Master
Street Plan design standard for the area. Mr. Giles stated there was currently confusion
concerning the Master Street Plan and the current requirement for the street in the area.
He stated Kanis Road in this area was classified as a Minor Arterial street segment. He
stated the concern was with the staff comment indicating street construction to collector
street standard. Mr. Giles stated the property owners to the north had constructed their
street segment to minor arterial standard. He stated if the adjacent property was not
developed in the same standard this would create a unsafe traffic situation.
Mr. Giles stated the Kroger development did not have access to Chenal Parkway
westbound except for the Kanis Road intersection. He stated the medians cut-off the
development and the intersection of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway was critical. Mr.
Giles stated the text and the map for the Master Street Plan both indicated this section
of Kanis Road as a minor arterial. He stated the confusion was why staff was
recommending the road be constructed to a collector standard.
Staff stated this section of Kanis Road was down graded to a local street when it was
determined that Kanis Road should turn north, east of One Source and connect with
Wellington Village Road. Staff stated an agreement was made with the property owner
to the east through a public/private partnership to purchase land for the right-of-way.
Mr. Giles stated this section of Kanis Road was never addressed. He stated the Master
Street Plan map and text continue to show this section as a minor arterial.
There was a general discussion concerning the street and the classification of the
street. Staff stated there was an ordinance drafted and adopted to reclassify the street.
Staff stated the map had been changed from a line map to a GIS map. Staff stated on
the Dairy Land plat the street was shown as a collector street. Staff also stated as other
properties in the area had redeveloped and collector street standard right-of-way had
been dedicated.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
8
Staff stated the Traffic Engineer was allowed by ordinance to increase the street width
at intersections. Staff stated this was the case at the intersection of Kanis and Chenal.
Staff stated the Wisenhunts wanted a traffic signal and wanted the intersection
increased to allow for the traffic signal to benefit their development. Staff stated this did
not change the classification of the entire segment of the street.
Staff stated the original traffic signal was to be located at Villages of Wellington. Staff
stated this was the section of Kanis Road that was to remain as the minor arterial and
the remainder of the road, from the Rock Creek Bridge west was to become a local
street. Staff stated property owners who have redeveloped in the area were not
required to install street improvements to arterial standard because the street was
reclassified as a collector street.
The Commission questioned if the proposed development would have an impact on
traffic if the road was not widened at this time. Staff stated a small carwash would not
have an impact on traffic in the area.
There was a discussion concerning the Master Street Plan text and the map. The
Commission questioned if the map was an official document. Staff stated with the Pagis
system a line segment could not be split mid-block. Staff stated this was a GIS glitch.
Staff stated there would be an amendment to the Master Street Plan, which would
clarify the confusion of the street segment and more clearly indicate this segment of
Kanis Road as a collector street.
Commissioner Lowry questioned whose role it was to determine the classification of the
street segment. Staff stated the Commission was guided by staff.
Mr. Doug Robertson spoke in opposition of the proposed street design. He stated he
was the representative of Kroger property located to the north. Mr. Robertson stated he
had visited with the owners of the carwash site and they had indicated they would
construct the street to whatever standard the city required.
Mr. Robertson stated the Kanis and Chenal intersection was a heavily traveled
intersection. He stated the road needed to be constructed to a minor arterial standard
to allow traffic to continue moving. Mr. Robertson stated staff could request some form
of reduced standard of street in this area for now and then develop the street as a minor
arterial at some point in the future.
Mr. Eugene Pheifer spoke in support of the development. He stated he had worked
with Mr. Lawson and a former city manager to develop a north south connection
between the Village of Wellington and Kanis Road. He stated the city had spent
$90,000 to purchase a portion of the right-of-way for the road. Mr. Pheifer stated there
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435
9
was currently $200,000 in a pool being held to construct the intersection of the north
south connection of Kanis Road. He stated this was not enough money and through a
public/private partnership the group was seeking additional funds.
Commissioner Rector questioned Mr. Robinson as to if the street were being
constructed to minor arterial standard would he be opposed to the proposed request.
Mr. Robinson stated he was not opposed to the carwash he was opposed to the street
standard being considered for construction. He stated the street should be constructed
to Master Street Plan standard as a minor arterial. Commissioner Rector stated the
request was a zoning request and not a request to amend the Master Street Plan. Mr.
Robertson stated the staff comment requested the street be constructed to a collector
standard and his objection was to the street standard. He stated the street should be
constructed to Master Street Plan standard as was the roadway to the north.
There was a discussion concerning the street and the width of the street adjacent to the
site. Staff stated practice had been to require dedication and construction of the street
in this area as a collector street. Staff stated even though there was some confusion on
the part of Mr. Robinson and others staff has been consistent in the requirement.
Staff stated they would proceed with an amendment to the Master Street Plan to correct
the problem and hopefully clear up any confusion.
A motion was made to approve the proposed development as filed. The motion carried
by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: LU03-01-04
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: 14410 Cantrell Rd.
Request: Transition to Commercial
Source: Ray Lusk
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Transition to
Commercial. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale
sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities.
Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they
serve.
Staff is not expanding the application since the Land Use Plan in this area was reviewed
six months ago.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently vacant land zoned R-2 Single Family and is 10.18 + acres in
size. The property to the north is vacant land zoned R-2 Single Family with a parcel of
vacant land further to the north zoned MF-12 Multifamily. The property to the east is
zoned Planned Commercial Development for a Bank, C-3 General Commercial for a
grocery store and drive-in restaurant. Further east, toward Black Street, the property is
zoned PCD, O-3 General Office, MF-12 and Open Space for an office building, church,
and vacant land. A bank is under construction on C-3 zoned property. The
development to the south includes a Liquor store zoned Planned Development -
Commercial, a car wash zoned PDC, a mini-warehouse zoned C-3, a PCD zoned strip
shopping center, vacant land zoned R-2 along Ison Creek, and houses located in the
Westbury subdivision zoned R-2. The property to the west consists of R-2 zoned
houses located in the Pine Mountain subdivision while the restaurant located west of
Pinnacle Valley Road is zoned PDC.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On February 18, 2003 multiple changes were made from Transition and Low Density
Residential to Suburban Office, Single Family, Commercial, Park / Open Space, Low
Density Residential, Office, and Public Institutional within a 1 mile radius of the
applicant’s property along Cantrell Road to recognize existing conditions.
On July 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family to Park / Open Space about 1
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-04
2
mile east of the property in question to recognize Pankey Park.
On April 20, 1999 multiple changes were made from Single Family and Low Density
Residential to Park / Open Space, Multifamily, Office, and Commercial on the north side
of Cantrell at Black Road to accommodate proposed development about 1/3 of a mile to
the east of the original application area.
The applicant’s property is shown as Transition on the Future Land Use Plan. All of the
land north of the study area is shown as Single Family. The neighboring property to the
east is shown as Transition and Commercial. At the intersection of Black Street, the
land is shown as Mixed Office Commercial, Office and Multifamily. The land on the
south side of Cantrell Road is shown as Low Density Residential east of Black Street,
Commercial west of Black Street, Transition between Cantrell Road and Ison Creek,
and Park / Open Space at Ison Creek. The land to the west is shown as Park / Open
Space along the floodway of Ison Creek and Transition west of the creek.
The applicant’s property was previously the subject of a land use plan amendment for a
change from Transition to Suburban Office and Single Family. The Planning
Commission denied both proposed changes at the January 9, 2003 Planning
Commission meeting. The Board of Directors adopted the Planning Commission’s
recommendation on February 18, 2003.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Cantrell Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Principal Arterial and is built to a
5-lane width with curb and gutter installed. Pinnacle Valley Road is shown as a Minor
Arterial built as a rural two lane road. There are no Bikeways shown that would be
affected by this amendment. Since the applicant’s property is located near an
intersection between a Principal and Minor Arterial, access to developments on the
applicant’s property will need to be provided in a way that does not create an
interference in the Level of Service (LOS) at the intersection.
PARKS:
The application area is located about halfway between Taylor Loop and Pankey Parks.
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that both parks are at
the outer edge of the eight-block radius of the plan’s goal of providing park and open
space facilities within an eight-block walking distance of all City of Little Rock residents.
Pankey Park located at Russ and Piggee Streets is shown as a Neighborhood Park
consisting of 5.0+ acres developed to serve the needs of the surrounding neighborhood.
Neighborhood Parks usually consist of a large open area and provide playground
facilities. Taylor Loop Park is shown as an Undeveloped Community Park of 35.0+
acres intended to serve the needs of the surrounding neighborhoods. Community
Parks provide a mixture of active and passive recreational facilities. Taylor Loop Park
would require development to conform to the classifications within the Parks and
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-04
3
Recreation Master Plan. Pankey Park does not require further development in order to
conform to the plan.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood
Action Plan. The plan contains a goal of preserving the environmental integrity of the
area and lists actions statements supporting the enforcement of the Highway 10 DOD
regulations, the tree preservation and hillside excavation ordinances.
ANALYSIS:
The application area is located in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The current
category of Transition shown for the applicant’s property is intended to serve as a step
between less intense land uses and more intense land uses. This application is an
increase if intensity of uses. The Transition category was intended to accommodate
residential areas and “nonconforming nonresidential uses.” In areas shown as
Transition, a Planned Zoning District is required unless an application conforms to the
Design Overlay standards. The design standards of the Highway 10 DOD are intended
to protect the scenic value of the Highway 10 DOD through the requirement of PZD’s.
Any development of the property in question would nee to conform to the design
standards of the Highway 10 DOD.
Most of the areas shown as Transition along Cantrell Road are characterized by low
densities of development with the majority of the land in these areas zoned either for
offices using the PZD process or R-2. The non-residential uses were zoned using the
Planned Zoning development process, a requirement for nonresidential uses in areas
shown as Transition.
The application area is located in an area of expanding Commercial development. Most
of the property shown as Commercial in the vicinity of the applicant’s property is
developed with existing Commercial uses. For some commercial uses, such as the
larger retail uses, the land available is built-out. For some of the less intense
Commercial uses some vacant land remains available. This application will expand the
area already shown as Commercial at 14000 Cantrell Road towards Pinnacle Valley
Road.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-04
4
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Pleasant Valley Property
Owners Association, River Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey Community
Improvement Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association, Pleasant Forest
Neighborhood Association, Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, Walton
Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association, Westbury Neighborhood Association,
and Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association. Staff has not received any
comments from area residents at this time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate. The change to Commercial will expand an
area shown as Commercial and be subject to the Highway 10 DOD requirements.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Donna James
made a presentation of item 10.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion
for item 10. See item 10.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Long Form
Planned Commercial Development.
Joe White, representing the applicant gave a brief description of the applicant’s plans
for developing the property.
Nathan Culp, President of the Westbury Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition
to the application. Mr. Culp opposed the proposed change from Transition to
Commercial based on the three following points: a change to Commercial would result
in the linear development of C-3 properties along Highway 10, the Commercial category
is not appropriate next to Single Family development, and a change to Commercial
would defeat the purpose of the Transition land use category which is intended to
provide a transition between residential uses and more intense uses.
Virginia Strohmeyer-Miles, Secretary of the Westbury Neighborhood Association, spoke
in opposition to the application citing her concerns that the application would result in
strip development along Highway 10.
Joe White, in response to the opposition, stated that a large office building would
generate more traffic than the applicant’s proposal would and that Lot 1 would be
separated from the proposed development.
Commissioner Mizan Rahman asked if Lot 1 was included in the Land Use Plan
Amendment. Jim Lawson stated that Lot 1 was included in the amendment application.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-04
5
Commissioner Judith Faust expressed concerns about reducing the area shown as
Transition of the Future Land Use Plan. Mr. Lawson stated that the intersection
between the two arterials at Highway 10 and Pinnacle Valley Road was a logical place
to expand an area shown as Commercial.
Commissioner Obrary Nunnley asked how Lot 1 would be treated. Mr. Lawson stated
that the applicant could submit a development proposal for Lot 1, or could exclude Lot 1
from the plan amendment.
Commissioner Norm Floyd asked a question about the size of Lot 1. Joe White stated
that Lot 1 was about 1 acre in size. Mr. Lawson stated that any future non-residential
development of Lot 1 would require a Planned Zoning Development. Joe White
requested to have the application amended to exclude Lot 1 from the Land Use Plan
Amendment.
A motion was made to approve the item as amended to exclude Lot 1 from the Land
Use Plan Amendment. The item was approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1
absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 10.1 FILE NO.: Z-7436
NAME: Lusk Long-form PCD
LOCATION: 14410 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
Ray Lusk
921 Rushing Circle
Little Rock, AR 72204
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 10.18 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Mini-warehouse development and a strip commercial center
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance – The creation of a lot without
public street frontage.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes a rezoning and the creation of a three lot plat for the
proposed development. Lot 1 contains 42,430 square feet and is currently
designated for future development with C-3, General Commercial uses. Lot 2
contains 76,532 square feet and proposes a retail building (C-3, General
Commercial) with 12,900 square feet of gross floor area and 60 parking spaces
or 4.65 per 1,000 square feet. Lot 3 is designated for 88,000 square feet of mini-
warehouse in eight buildings and an 1800 square foot office/residence.
The three lots will be served by one curb cut off Cantrell Road. The driveway is
approximately midway between Candlewood Drive and Pinnacle Valley Road.
The development does not abut Candlewood Drive to the east. There is a strip
of land not owned by the applicant approximately 30-feet in width between
Candlewood Drive and the eastern boundary of the site.
Hours of operation for the commercial site are proposed as 7:00 am to 10:00 pm
seven days per week and the mini-warehouse is proposed with 24-hour access.
The mini-warehouse development will be gated with security access.
The applicant has indicated the backs of the mini-warehouse buildings will be
used as screening and an eight-foot opaque fence will be installed where there
are breaks in the buildings. The applicant also proposes the placement of an
eight-foot opaque fence along the northwestern boundary in the area that adjoins
the R-2, Single-family zoned property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family structure with a non-conforming
industrial use adjacent to the home. A concrete pumping company (the non-
conforming industrial use) occupies a single building near the rear of the site.
Further to the west of the site is a single-family subdivision with homes fronting
onto Pine Mountain Road. Pine Mountain Road is a short cul-de-sac with
approximately 30 homes. To the east of the site is the Candlewood Shopping
Center (Kroger, Superior Bank, Sonic).
To the south of the site is vacant property with a large drainage ditch. There is a
mini-warehouse development located south and east of the proposed
development and a PCD for a commercial shopping center and a PD-C for a
carwash are also located to the southeast.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. The Westchester and the Westbury Neighborhood Associations, the
Pankey Improvement Association and the Secluded Hills Property Owners
Association along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site
and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were
notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standards.
2. Access easement must not touch Lot 1 except at future driveway location
150 feet from right-of-way.
3. Provide design and construct right-turn lane onto Pinnacle Valley Road.
Coordinate with plans by Pulaski County and with Traffic Engineering,
including striping. Dedicate additional right-of-way, if necessary, for street
improvements. Re-locate signal equipment.
4. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Sec. 29-186 (e).
5. Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are required.
6. Land Alteration Ordinance applies. Terracing rules apply.
7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
8. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Comply with
maximum grade requirements of Section 31-210.
9. A Grading Permit will be required per Sec. 29-186 (c) & (d).
10. Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
11. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required
for Lot 3. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: A 10-foot easement along all property lines is required. Contact SBC at 373-
5112 (Charles McDonald) for additional details.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
4
Central Arkansas Water: An easement and a water main extension will be required
to maintain service to the property north of Lot 1. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of connection(s) will apply to service this project, in addition to
normal charges. For Lot 2 this will apply to metered connections only. The Little
Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional
public and/or private fire facilities will be required. If additional water facilities are
required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. If there are facilities that
need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work
would be done at the expense of the developer. All Central Arkansas Water
requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. This
development will have minor impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed
water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Add fire hydrants on the site. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a retail building at the
front of the property and a mini-warehouse at the back of the property.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on
this agenda.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan
contains a goal of preserving the environmental integrity of the area and lists
actions statements supporting the enforcement of the Highway 10 design overlay
regulations, the tree preservation and hillside excavation ordinances.
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
western perimeter of this development where adjacent to residential property.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
5
Prior to a building permit being obtained, it will be necessary to submit approved
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff gave an overview of
the development to the Committee members indicating the request was for a
planned commercial development and as a part of the request the applicant was
proposing a preliminary plat containing three lots. Staff requested the applicant
provide additional information regarding the driveway widths of the proposed
mini-warehouse development. Staff also requested all building setbacks be
dimensioned from the property lines.
Staff noted the sign would be required to conform to the Highway 10 Design
Overlay standards. Staff also noted the area set aside for detention was located
in the front area usually designated with a berm under the Highway 10 Overlay
Standard.
Staff requested additional information concerning the alignment of Pinnacle
Valley Road. Staff noted the County had plans to realign Pinnacle Valley Road
and Staff questioned if there would be any useable land from an adjoining
property located west of Lot 1 after the relocation. Staff suggested the applicant
consider allowing access from Lot 1, through the property located to the west,
owned by the applicant, to Pine Mountain Road. This would then allow patrons
of the development access to the traffic signal at Pinnacle Valley Road and
Cantrell Road. Staff stated without this access there were serious concerns with
safety from motorists trying to exit the site and travel eastbound.
Staff also noted the location of the driveway was very close to the intersection of
Pinnacle Valley Road and Highway 10. Staff stated a right turn lane taper would
be required and the driveway location was within the taper.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be
required and approval from ADEQ would be required prior to the start of work.
Staff also noted easements for the proposed stormwater drainage would be
required.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted a six foot opaque screen
would be required along the western perimeter of the development adjacent to
the residentially zoned property.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
6
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated the hours of operation for the commercial development will be from
7:00 am to 10:00 pm seven days per week. Staff feels these hours to be
conducive to the neighborhood and should have minimal impact on the nearby
neighborhoods. The applicant is proposing the mini-warehouse to be 24-hour
access. The development will have security access and an on-site manager.
With the two security measures in place, this should have minimal impact on the
nearby neighbors. In addition, none of the buildings will have doors on the
exterior of the site, which should limit the noise from the development into the
neighborhood.
The applicant has indicated no building constructed will exceed 35-feet in height.
The applicant has stated the commercial building located on Lot 2 will be used to
screen the rear lot (Lot 3) from Cantrell Road. The site slopes from north to
south with the northern elevation being near 340 and the southern elevation (at
Cantrell Road) near 308. Grading will take place along the northern portion of
the site for the building placement. It appears the building will be set at 318.
With the placement of the commercial building in the front of the site, the mini-
warehouse development should be screened from the roadway. In addition the
area set-aside for the apartment/office will have windows on the face to soften
the mini-warehouse look of the building. Staff is supportive of the design of the
development and the screening of the mini-warehouses from Cantrell Road.
The applicant has also indicated the roof material for the mini-warehouse
development will be non-reflective materials. Staff is supportive of the roofing
material for the development and feels the chosen material should have the least
impact on the surrounding area.
The applicant has indicated the building located on Lot 2 will utilize C-3. General
Commercial uses. Staff is not supportive of allowing C-3, General Commercial
uses on the site. Staff would recommend the applicant utilize the uses in the O-
3, General Office District and the allowed accessory uses as selected uses for
the site. This would allow the applicant limited commercial uses along with office
uses for the development. Staff feels this a more acceptable mix for the
development and have the least impact on the nearby neighborhoods.
The applicant is requesting C-3, General Commercial uses for the proposed Lot
1 as well. Staff is not supportive of including any uses for the lot since no
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
7
development has been identified. Staff is however, supportive of the proposed
platting of Lot 1. Staff feels with Lot 1 being included in the proposed
development at this time access to the west can be gained. Staff feels this
access is critical to the development. With this access the patrons of the site
may access the traffic signal in place at Pinnacle Valley Road. With the
protection of the signal the motorist may safely make a left turn to travel
eastbound on Cantrell Road.
The applicant is proposing signage consistent with the Highway 10 Overlay
District. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign to be a
maximum of 10-feet in height and 100 square feet in area. The applicant has
indicated the sign will be placed on the western side of the single driveway into
the development from Cantrell Road. Staff is supportive of the sign design and
placement.
The applicant has indicated the 25-foot proposed future driveway along proposed
Lot 1 at 75 feet. Staff recommends the driveway location be at least 150-feet
from the property line adjacent to Cantrell Road. Although there are some
concerns with the placement of this future driveway location staff feels the
driveway location appropriate to line-up with the future access to Pinnacle Valley
Road.
The applicant is proposing variances from the Subdivision Ordinance with the
proposed preliminary plat, a component of this development. The applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage
(Section 31-231). The applicant has indicated a 60-foot wide access and utility
easement for the development. There is also parcel of property located to the
north of proposed Lot 1 which is currently land-locked and serviced by an access
easement along the eastern property line of proposed Lot 1. With the placement
of the access and utility easement, the land-locked parcel will maintain access to
their property. Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow the lot to
develop in this manner. The proposed access easement should allow access to
the site and have minimal impact in the future.
The applicant is proposing the placement of 50 parking spaces on proposed Lot
2. This should be adequate to service the development. If the site were to
develop as requested (C-3, General Commercial uses) then the development
would require a typical minimum parking requirement of 43 parking spaces. With
the proposed development developing with O-3, General Office uses the typical
minimum parking demand would be 32 parking spaces. The proposed parking
for the proposed Lot 2 should be sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking
demand.
The applicant is proposing the placement of three parking spaces on proposed
Lot 3. The typical minimum parking demand for an office/apartment would be
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
8
five parking spaces; based on one space per four hundred square feet. Although
the proposed parking is not sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking
demand, the parking proposed should be adequate to serve the site. The mini-
warehouse portion of the site will utilize the access drives and warehouse bays
for parking.
Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. Staff recommends the
preliminary plat be approved as presented and is supportive of the variance to
allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
Staff is supportive of the development on proposed Lots 2 and 3 if Lot 2 is
developed utilizing the O-3, General Office District uses and the O-3 allowed
accessory uses. Staff is not supportive of the development if the applicant
intends to develop the site with the requested C-3, General Commercial District
uses.
Staff is also not supportive of allowing Lot 1 to be developed without a specific
use or a building footprint. Staff feels the speculative development does not
follow the previous pattern established for development along the Highway 10
Corridor.
Staff does not recommend approval of the inclusion of the proposed Lot 1 within
the Planned Commercial Development since no site plan has been submitted for
development of this lot.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of this report.
Staff recommends the development be developed utilizing O-3, General Office
District uses.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the creation of a
lot without public street frontage for proposed Lot 3.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were objectors present. Staff introduced the item with a recommendation of
approval of the Future Land Use Plan amendment. Staff also presented a
recommendation of approval of the requested preliminary plat and the requested PCD
for Lots 2 and 3. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting O-3 uses as allowable
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7436
9
uses for Lot 2 and the accessory uses listed under the O-3 classification. Staff stated
there would not be a limit placed on the gross floor area allowed for the accessory uses.
Mr. Nathan Culp spoke in opposition of the proposal. He stated the neighborhood was
not opposed to the development of Lot 3, the mini-warehouse development or the
development of Lot 2 with O-3 uses and the accessory uses. He stated the
neighborhood was opposed to changing the Future Land Use Plan to include the large
area of commercial. He stated the idea of the Highway 10 Overlay District was to
create commercial nodes. He stated with the change this was eating away at the
commercial node and creating a linear commercial development along the roadway.
Ms. Virginia Strohmeyer-Miles spoke in opposition of the proposed change. She stated
she was the secretary of the Westbury Neighborhood Association. Ms. Miles stated the
city was encouraging the development of Cantrell Road as a commercial strip by
changing the Future Land Use Plan for the area. She stated there was not a
development proposed for Lot 1 and by changing the land use at this time this was
encouraging the development of the lot as a commercial use.
There was a general discussion concerning Lot 1 and the change of the Future Land
Use plan without a development proposal. There were concerns by the Commission of
the treatment of Lot 1 in the future. The discussion concerned the allowable uses for
Lot 1 and the potential for the lot to develop as a commercial site if shown on the Future
Land Use Plan as a commercial site.
The applicant requested Lot 1 be removed from the Future Land Use Plan amendment.
A motion was made to approve the Future Land Use Plan amendment as amended to
exclude the area indicated as Lot 1. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 no and
1 absent.
A motion was made to approve the PCD request as amended to include O-3 including
the listed accessory uses for Lot 2, the mini-warehouse development on Lot 3 and the
removal of Lot 1 from the PCD request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 noes 1 absent.
A motion was made to approve the preliminary plat as filed and the requested
variances. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no and 2 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: S-6-D
NAME: Broadmoor Shopping Center Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: On the northwest corner of Lakeshore Drive and South University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
J.D. and E, Inc.
13700 Saddle Hill Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 9.1 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 10 – Boyle Park
CENSUS TRACT: 21.02
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Waiver of Master Street Plan requirements with
regard to street improvements to South University Avenue.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the construction of a Twin City Bank branch location at
the northwest corner of University Avenue and Lakeshore Drive. The facility will
be located in the existing Broadmoor Shopping Center and the proposed bank
will be constructed in close proximity of an existing building, which will be
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-6-D
2
removed to allow the construction. The building is proposed as 3588 square feet
with five drive-through lanes and thirty-three parking spaces leased to the bank.
The applicant proposes the days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to
6:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 8:00 am to 12:00 pm on Saturday.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a commercial shopping center located on South University Avenue.
There is a structure located where the new building is proposed (a former Fitness
Center). A new Pizza Hut has been constructed within the shopping center
parking lot. Other uses in the area include a church located on Lakeshore Drive
south of the site and a convenience store is located adjacent to University
Avenue. East of the shopping center is the UALR campus. The area west of the
shopping center is the Broadmoor Subdivision.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property located within 200-feet of the proposed site along with the
College Terrace Neighborhood Association and the Broadmoor Neighborhood
Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Lakeshore Drive and West 28th Street are classified on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
2. University Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline is required.
3. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvement to the streets including 5-foot sidewalks with the
planned development. University requires in-lieu contribution based on public
project plans. (The public project requires the dedication of an additional 7
feet of right-of-way along South University Avenue the entire length of the
applicant’s property.)
4. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding streetlight requirements.
5. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersections.
6. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Maximum grades
per Section 31-210 apply.
7. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-6-D
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Existing sewer main on site. No building foundation allowed within five
foot of the existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414
for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or
additional water meter(s) are required. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438
for additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: Portions of the proposed street buffer width along Lakeshore Drive
drops below the eighteen (18) foot minimum allowed by ordinance. The full width
requirement being thirty-six (36) feet. Additionally, portions of the proposed
perimeter landscape strip along Lakeshore Drive drops below the nine (9) foot
minimum required by the Landscape Ordinance.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide copies of
approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff introduced the item
indicating the request was a multiple building site plan review to add a Twin City
Bank branch location in the Broadmoor Shopping center. Staff requested the
applicant indicate on the site plan the additional right-of-way required and the
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-6-D
4
new parking layout once the dedication was completed. Staff also requested the
southern drive within the parking lot be one-way access to the west. Staff stated
if the drive remained two-way there was a potential for cars to backup onto
Lakeshore Drive.
Staff also requested information concerning days and hours of operation, number
of employees and signage. Staff requested the applicant indicate in the general
notes section the maximum building height.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated additional right-of-way
along South University Avenue necessary to satisfy the public project would be
requested. Staff also noted additional right-of-way along West 28th Street and
Lakeshore Drive would be required.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the perimeter street buffer
along the southern boundary dropped below the minimum width allowed. Staff
stated along Lakeshore Drive the minimum width allowed by zoning ordinance
was eighteen feet. Staff noted the required buffer per the Landscape Ordinance
was nine feet. Staff stated the Commission could elect to reduce the buffer along
Lakeshore Drive to the required nine feet but anything less would require
approval from the City Beautiful Commission.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on July 8, 2003 addressing
most of the issues raised at the July 3, 200 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated landscaping in most areas sufficient to meet the minimum
requirements. The applicant has not however met the minimum requirement in
one location of the site. The area located adjacent to the drive onto Lakeshore
Drive still drops below the nine foot minimum. If the applicant were to remove
one parking space the minimum could be met. Staff recommends the applicant
remove one parking space in this area to meet the minimum requirement of the
Landscape Ordinance.
The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way along Lakeshore Drive
and West 28th Street as requested by Public Works staff. The applicant has also
indicated a 20-foot radial dedication at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and
South University Avenue as requested. Along South University Avenue, the
applicant has indicated a dedication of seven feet of additional right-of-way. This
dedication will meet the required right-of-way necessary to complete the public
project which is currently under design for this area. The applicant has indicated
they do not wish to construct the required street improvements. Staff feels the
street improvements should be put in place as a part of this development. In the
past, policy has been if the public project goes to bid prior to the applicant pulling
a building permit the city pays for the improvements. If the applicant pulls a
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-6-D
5
building permit prior to the bid, the applicant pays for the improvements. The
public project has not gone to bid, therefore the applicant should pay for the cost
of the street improvements or in this case the placement of sidewalks along the
entire property frontage. Public Works has indicated an in-lieu contribution would
be acceptable and the applicant has indicated they do not wish to pursue this
option either.
The applicant has indicated the building will not exceed 28-feet in height. The
requested height is consistent with allowed building heights in the C-3, General
Commercial District.
The applicant has indicated there is an existing bill board on the site which will
remain. The applicant has also indicated a single pylon sign will be placed at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and South University Avenue. The applicant has
requested the maximum sign area allowed by ordinance or a maximum of 36 feet
in height and 160 square feet in area.
The applicant has indicated the bank will operate from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm
Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 12 noon on Saturday. The applicant has
indicated there will be no more than six employees reporting daily to the site.
Staff feels the hours proposed and the number of employees should have
minimal impact on the area.
The applicant has indicated the bank will lease the ground space and parking.
The development will maintain a cross access parking agreement for the entirety.
The bank is proposing 33 parking spaces within the ground lease area. The
building is estimated to be 3588 square feet in gross floor area. The typical
minimum parking required would be eight parking spaces. The proposed parking
along with the existing parking is not sufficient to meet the typical minimum
parking demand based on one space per three hundred square feet of gross
floor area. Based on the entire development the total square footage of gross
floor area available is 87,238 and there are 268 parking spaces on the site. Staff
is not concerned with the available parking for the site since the site is a
developed site and parking has not been an issue in the past. In addition, the
new building is not being constructed on currently available parking. The building
is replacing a vacant building on the site.
Staff is supportive of the proposed development. In staff’s opinion, the applicant
has met the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant
is however requesting a waiver of the requirement for street improvements. Staff
feels the applicant should install the street improvements (sidewalks) along
South University Avenue as required by ordinance. Staff also feels the applicant
should remove one parking space along Lakeshore Drive to increase the
landscape strip to the nine foot minimum required by the Landscape Ordinance.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the proposed addition of the bank building should
have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding area.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-6-D
6
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the developer place the street improvements (sidewalk) along
South University Avenue or pay an in-lieu contribution for the street
improvements.
Staff recommends the applicant remove one parking space along Lakeshore
Drive to increase the minimum landscape strip to the nine feet required by the
Landscape Ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the
request as filed subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E
and F of the above report.
Staff stated their recommendation had changed concerning the required dedication of
right-of-way and street improvements. Staff stated their recommendation was a waiver
of right-of-way dedication for South University Avenue. Staff stated their
recommendation concerning the placement of street improvements was now street
improvements would only be required by the developer along the portion of South
University Avenue and Lakeshore Drive adjacent to the lease area by the Twin City
Bank facility.
Staff presented a recommendation that the applicant remove one parking space along
Lakeshore Drive to increase the minimum landscape strip to the nine feet required by
the Landscape Ordinance.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: S-285-CCC
NAME: Dogwood Crossing – The Ranch Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: On the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and South Katillus Road
DEVELOPER:
The CJ Cropper Company
#5 Inwood Circle
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 4.45 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 20 - Pinnacle
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the placement of three buildings on this 4.4 acre site.
The total square footage of the buildings is 42,644. There are 204 parking
spaces proposed with the development or 4.8 spaces per 1000 square feet. The
developer proposes to develop the project in two phases; with Building A in
Phase I and Buildings B and C in Phase II. The buildings will contain a mixture
of C-3 uses.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-CCC
2
Building C is proposed as a two story building with the second story generally
designated as office space. Building B is planned to have a restaurant on the
south end with possible outdoor seating. An additional restaurant could develop
in Building A. A drive-through is proposed at the north end of Building A.
The applicant has indicated improvements will be constructed along Katillus
Road with the development of Phase II to Master Street Plan standard.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant, relatively flat site with a large drainage ditch along the
northern perimeter of the site. The site was preliminary platted with shared
access drives between proposed lots, which have been constructed. North
Katillus Road has not been constructed to Master Street Plan standard. There
are open ditches for drainage and no sidewalks on the street.
There are commercial and office uses located within the Ranch Development.
There is a Quick Shop located to the south of the site and a restaurant located to
the north of the site. There are large office developments located to the north
and west of the site, Leisure Arts and Cingular.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property abutting the proposed site along with the Aberdeen Court
Property Owners Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association
and the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public
Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Construct sidewalk on abutting service drive.
2. Katillus is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street.
Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
3. Driveways shall conform to Section 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. North
driveway must be located 125 feet from property line.
4. Easements shown for proposed stormdrainage are required. Per the
stormdrain manual.
5. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186.
Show facilities along north property line.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show area where
located.
7. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with the
planned development. Half-street width is 18 feet.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-CCC
3
8. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding street light requirements.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Grease trap will be required
for all restaurants. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional
details.
Entergy: A 30-foot easement is required along the perimeter of the site for
overhead facilities. Contact Entergy at 954-5165 for additional details.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this
site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire protection facilities will
be required. If additional water facilities are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will
apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off a private fire
system. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for
water service must be met. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. This development will have minor impact on
existing water distribution system. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for
additional details
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-6752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: The proposed on-site street buffer along Katillus Road drops below
the eighteen (18) foot average width requirement and below the nine (9) foot
minimum width allowed with transfers.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-CCC
4
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required.
Building landscaping areas need to be indicated.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide approved
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request
was a multiple building site plan review for a lot located in the Ranch Subdivision.
Staff stated the shared access drives were in place along lot lines as was
required at the time of platting. Staff noted the dumpster locations on the
proposed site plan indicating the dumpsters were located adjacent to the public
right-of-way. Staff stated this did not comply with the ordinance and requested
the applicant relocate the dumpsters. The applicant requested the dumpster
remain behind the building. Staff stated if the applicant would install a screening
wall and landscape adjacent to the right-of-way, which would create a service
corridor, it would be palatable to support the location of the dumpsters adjacent
to the public right-of-way.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed right-of-way
did not meet the minimum requirement. Staff suggested the applicant narrow the
drive lanes and move the buildings to the west to allow for the required right-of-
way. Staff stated South Katillus Road would be required to be constructed to
Master Street Plan standard or designed to match the bridge located near
Cantrell Road.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the on-site street buffer
dropped below the nine foot minimum required. Staff suggested the applicant
narrow the proposed landscape strip along the western property line to increase
the width of the eastern buffer.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff on July 7, 2003 addressing most
of the issues raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated signage in two locations. The applicant is requesting
each of the signs to be pylon sign maximum allowed by ordinance or the bill of
assurance. The site is zoned C-3, General Commercial District, which would
allow for a sign 36-feet in height and a maximum of 160 square feet in area.
Although the proposed signage is allowed under the ordinance for commercial
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-CCC
5
signage, staff would suggest the applicant consider signage more conducive to
the Highway 10 Design Overlay standard.
The applicant has indicated the maximum building height to be 35-feet. There
are two, one story buildings and one, two story building proposed as a part of the
development. Staff is supportive of the proposed building heights.
The applicant has indicated there will be a total of 42,595 square feet of gross
floor area within the development. There are also 204 parking spaces proposed
with the development. The typical minimum parking required for a shopping
center development based on one space per two hundred and twenty five square
feet would be 189 parking spaces.
The applicant has indicated a possibility of two restaurants locating on the site.
One location identified is a 5460 square foot area, which would require 54
parking spaces and the second area is a 4608 square foot area requiring 46
parking spaces. Should the two restaurants locate on the site, the typical
minimum parking required would be 208 parking spaces. Staff feels the
proposed parking should be sufficient to meet the demand even if two separate
restaurants locate on the site.
The applicant has indicated the rear of the buildings along Katillus will be used as
screening walls. The applicant has also indicated a service drive will access the
rear of the buildings for dumpster locations and deliveries. The applicant has
included landscaping, six foot high evergreen plantings to provide screening.
Staff would request the applicant also install a fence or wall in this area. The
service drive will function as such and the dumpsters will be placed in this area.
The evergreen screening plants will not be sufficient to screen the activity in this
area. Staff would recommend the landscaping be placed along the roadway to
soften the fence or wall and then a six foot fence or wall be placed between the
landscaping strip and the service drive.
The applicant has not relocated the northern driveway to meet ordinance
requirements. The drive is located adjacent to the northern property line on
Katillus Road. Staff is supportive of this location since the development will be
served by a rear service drive.
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 6:00 am
to midnight seven days per week. The hours proposed should have minimal
impact on the surrounding area. There is an existing convenience store located
on the corner of Katillus Road and Cantrell Road which operates under similar
hours.
The applicant has not relocated the northern dumpster outside the view of the
street. Staff would recommend the dumpster be relocated to the service drive or
to the parking lot area adjacent to Lot 4, Tract A.
The applicant has increased the landscape areas to the nine-foot minimum. The
applicant has also indicated the storm drains located within the property will be
piped to the northeast corner of the project. The applicant has indicated a three
foot landscape planter will be placed in front of each building.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-CCC
6
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial District and
the applicant has met the intent of the Subdivision Ordinance for a multiple
building site plan review. Staff feels the current layout with three buildings and
associated parking should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding
area, if modified as suggested by staff.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the applicant place a six foot screening fence or wall in
addition to and adjacent to the landscape strip along Katillus Road. The
screening fence or wall should be located between the landscaping strip and the
service drive.
Staff recommends the northern dumpster be relocated to the rear of the building
in the service drive area or to the parking lot area adjacent to Lot 4, Tract A.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the
request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the above report.
Staff also presented a recommendation the applicant place a six foot screening fence or
wall in addition to and adjacent to the landscape strip along Katillus Road. The
screening fence or wall should be located between the landscaping strip and the service
drive.
Staff also recommended the northern dumpster be relocated to the rear of the building
in the service drive area or to the parking lot area adjacent to Lot 4, Tract A.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: S-434-M
NAME: Southwest City Commercial Lot B-R-5 Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Southeast of the I-30 Frontage Road and the Geyer Springs
Road intersection
DEVELOPER:
Flake and Kelley Management
425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 6.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 14 – Geyer Springs East
CENSUS TRACT: 41.07
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the placement of a 3500 square foot building on the site
to accommodate a restaurant with a drive-through facility. The applicant has
indicated the driveway will be narrowed to 36-feet as required by ordinance and
has indicated the drive lane entering the site will be striped as one-way. The
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-434-M
2
development will share a cross access easement for parking and service drive
with the remainder of the 6.0 acre site.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is the existing parking lot of the former Southwest City Mall. The State
Police currently occupy a large portion of the former mall and there are several
out-parcels adjoining the site. There is a restaurant located to the south of the
site and a service station located on the corner of Geyer Springs Road and
Dreher Lane. West of the proposed development is a mix of commercial uses
located on C-3 and C-4 zoned property. Along the I-30 Frontage Road there are
commercial and office uses including restaurants, a bank, a motel and office
uses.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an
adjoining property owner. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site
along with Southwest United for Progress and the Cloverdale Neighborhood
Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Driveways shall conform to Section 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. Change
width to 36 feet.
2. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
3. Revise islands at end of thru-aisle. Separate bypass from external service
drive. Reduce thru-aisle to 18 feet width where it exits. Consult Traffic
Engineering at 379-1850 for additional details.
4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Grease Traps are required
for all restaurants. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional
details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-434-M
3
time of request for water service must be met. Existing waterline easements should
be shown. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: A small portion of the proposed street buffer along Geyer Springs
Road drops 1 ½ foot below the 12 foot minimum width allowed. The full width
average requirement is 24 feet.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide copies of
an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Hank Kelly were present representing the request. Staff
stated the request was located in the old Southwest City Mall, the location of the
State Police Headquarters. Staff also noted additional information was required
on the proposed site plan. Staff requested information regarding days and hours
of operation and any proposed signage.
Staff stated they had concerns with the proposed site plan with regard to the
circulation. Staff stated if the existing drive was not reduced to one-way traffic
there were potential conflicts. Staff suggested the driveway width be narrowed
to 36-feet on the site plan and to indicate one-way traffic into the shopping
center.
Landscaping comments were briefly discussed. Staff noted the proposed
landscaping near the southern right-of-way dropped below the required 12-foot
minimum.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-434-M
4
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
narrowed the entrance drive to 36-feet as requested by Public Works staff and
has placed arrows on the drive indicating one-way traffic into the site. The
driveway at Geyer Springs will be two way access for persons wishing to leave
the restaurant but after entering the site the drive will become one-way. This is
to reduce the potential conflicts within the development of customers using the
drive-through window and patrons of the remainder of the site.
The applicant has revised the island at the end of the through-aisle to separate
the by-pass traffic from the external service drive. Staff is supportive of the
proposed design.
The applicant has increased the landscape strip along the Geyer Springs Road
to the minimum width required or 12-foot. Staff is supportive of the proposed
landscaping on the site.
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be seven days
per week from 6:00 am to 2:00 am. The site is located near the interstate and
the frontage road and with the proposed hours there should be minimal to no
negative impact on the area. The area has developed with 24-hour service sites
and sites which have extended hours of operation so the requested hours are
similar to the hours in the area.
The applicant is proposing the maximum building height to be 25-feet. The
proposed building height is consistent with building heights allowed in the C-3,
General Commercial District.
The applicant has indicated there will be a dumpster located on the site near the
rear of the portion identified for the restaurant. The applicant has indicated the
dumpster will be screened on three sides with an opaque screening. The
dumpster will be visible from the street but with the placement of the restaurant
on the site there is not an acceptable alternative location. Staff feels with the
proper screening the dumpster placement, is in an acceptable location.
The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on the south side of the
entrance drive. The applicant is requesting the maximum signage allowed for the
commercial district or a maximum of thirty-six feet in height and one hundred
sixty square feet in area.
Staff is supportive of the proposed development. To staff’s knowledge there are
no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the
proposed multiple building site plan review meets with minimum ordinance
requirements and should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding
area.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-434-M
5
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Hank Kelly were present representing the request. There were
no objectors present. Staff stated they were supportive of the proposed development.
To stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff stated they felt the proposed multiple building site plan review
had met the minimum ordinance requirements and should have minimal to no adverse
impact on the surrounding area.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with
the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: S-1042-AA
NAME: The Villages at Wellington Revised Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Wellington Plantation Drive and Wellington Plantation Court
DEVELOPER:
Winrock Development Corporation
2222 Cottondale Lane
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 48.7 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 124 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.10
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Placement of sidewalks along Wellington
Valley Court.
BACKGROUND:
A proposal was filed to subdivision this 47.5 acre site into 115 single-family lots. The
request was heard and recommended for approval by the Little Rock Planning
Commission on August 8, 2003. The Little Rock Board of Directors approved the
proposed variances from the Subdivision Ordinance for the preliminary plat on
September 3, 2003 with Ordinance No. 18,736. The lots were to be accessed by an
internal connection of residential streets both 24 and 26 feet wide. A portion of the
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-AA
2
development was proposed to be rear loading; Block 13 and Block 14, with 18-foot
alleyways connecting to the rear. The applicant proposed a 10-foot restrictive access
easement on the street side of Lots 14 – 36 of Block 13 and Lots 1 – 20 of Block 14.
The applicant proposed a 20-foot building line to be located on several of the lots; in
Block 13, Lots 14 – 36 and Lots 1 – 20 in Block 14. The applicant proposed all lots in
Block 13 and 14 to be smaller lots and developed as garden style patio homes with a
side yard setback of five (5) feet. The average lot size in this area was proposed as 60
foot by 120 foot or 7200 square feet. Block 15 was proposed for large lot sizes. The
average lot size in this area was proposed as 80-foot by 150-foot or 12,000 square feet.
Due to the topography of the site, the applicant proposed 10% grades at street
intersections. The applicant indicated hillside development standards would apply to
this area of the site. The average slope of the area was presented at 10% with ranges
from 7% to 18% near the northern boundary of the site. The applicant indicated Hillside
development standards would be used to develop Lots 19 – 34 and Lots 53 – 57.
The applicant proposed the development to be developed in phases to be determined
by the market demand.
Previously approved waivers and variances still in effect include (Ordinance No.
18,736):
1. A 20-foot platted front building line on Lots 14-36 of Block 13 and Lots 1 –20 of
Block 14.
2. Creation of a Pipe Stem Lot (Lot 19).
3. A five (5) foot platted side yard setback on Lots 6 – 35 of Block 13 and Lots 1 – 20 of
Block 14.
4. A 10% grade at street intersections.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting a waiver of sidewalk placement on Wellington Valley
Court. The street currently serves eleven lots and stubs into an additional piece
of property containing approximately one acre. The applicant has indicated
existing topography prohibits any additional property to the north to be served
from Wellington Valley Court.
Wellington Valley Court is proposed as a minor residential street approximately
700 feet in length ending in a hammer head.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site with several grade changes. Immediately
south of the site is the Property Owners Association Community Park, the Park at
Wellington, complete with swimming pool and playground equipment.
Construction has begun on the first phase of the development; the southern
portion (the area previously identified for patio homes).
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-AA
3
The proposed subdivision abuts the single-family subdivisions of St. Charles and
Villages of Wellington. The area to the north is vacant R-2 zoned property as is
the area to the west. The area to the east remains undeveloped R-2 zoned
property.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area residents.
The St. Charles Neighborhood Association and all abutting property owners were
notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required
for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Water main extensions will be required to serve this
property including off site improvements. A Capital Investment Charge based on the
size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges
will apply to all meter connections, except residential sprinkler meters. All Central
Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must
be met. This development will have minor impact on existing water distribution
system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-AA
4
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Doug McNeil were present representing the request. Staff
stated the request was a revision to a previously approved preliminary plat. Staff
stated the only revision was to one area of the plat. Staff stated the request was
to not be required to place sidewalks along Wellington Valley Court as was
previously proposed.
Mr. White stated the street was less than the maximum length allowed for a
minor residential street and less than the maximum number of lots allowed. Mr.
White stated the street would serve eleven lots and be approximately 700 feet in
length. He stated the road would end in a hammer head turnaround with right-
of-way extending to the northern property line to allow the one acre tract access
to a public street should the owner ever decide to develop the tract.
Staff stated if the area north of the indicated one-acre tract were to develop then
this would no longer be the case. Staff stated if the area developed, the street
would no longer meet the requirement of a minor residential street. Mr. White
stated the topography of the area to the north of the single one-acre tract was
such that the likelihood of it ever developing and being served by this road was
very unlikely. He stated the required grades would not allow the street to be
extended. He stated a previous plat allowed for the area to be served by an
extension of Belle Point Drive if the owners ever decided to develop the area.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is a
revision to a previously approved preliminary plat in one location only. The
request to revise the plat is to remove a segment of sidewalk along Wellington
Valley Court. The applicant has indicated the street meets the minimum
requirements to be a minor residential street, which does not require sidewalks.
Staff is somewhat supportive of the theory.
The applicant has indicated the street, Wellington Valley Court, will end in a
hammer head turnaround with right-of-way extending to the north to allow access
to a one-acre tract. Wellington Valley Court is estimated to be 700 feet in length
from the property line. The street serves eleven lots and the maximum number
of lots a minor residential street can serve is thirty.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-AA
5
The street does meet the 700-foot maximum requirement but when the one-acre
tract to the north develops then the street will no longer meet the maximum
length requirement. The street will still meet the maximum number of lots
requirement. Since the street will be a public street and the applicant has
indicated the design to be compatible with city vehicles (garbage, fire), staff can
support allowing the street to develop without a cul-de-sac.
The area located north of the one-acre tract is very unlikely to develop from this
street. The existing topography does not lend itself to the development of the
streets on grades that would be acceptable to the city. In addition, a triangular
piece of property located at the northern end of Belle Point Drive was held by the
owner to allow access to the area further north of the one-acre tract.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the removal of the sidewalk along Wellington
Valley Court should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff stated they felt the
removal of the sidewalk along Wellington Valley Court should have minimal to no
adverse impact on the surrounding area.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: S-1392
NAME: Pinnacle Ridge Estates Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: 300-feet north of Old Arkansas Drive and Barrett Road
DEVELOPER:
Jimmy Pougetti
c/o White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 8.78 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 29 – Barrett
CENSUS TRACT: 42.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Creation of lots without public street frontage.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this previously platted tract (Tract G,
Pinnacle Ridge Estates) into two single-family lots. The average lot size
proposed is 4.4 acres. The applicant is requesting a variance from the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage.
One of the lots proposed without public street frontage is a lot containing an
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1392
2
existing residence and is currently served by a 20-foot road easement off Old
Arkansas Drive, a private street. The second lot adjoins Old Arkansas Drive.
The applicant is proposing septic tank for disposal of wastewater and the water
to be furnished by Maumelle Water Corporation (Roland).
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains a single-family home with access through a private access
easement but does have public street frontage along Old Arkansas Road. The
area is predominately vacant with single-family homes built on acreage.
Old Arkansas Road is a private street and is a narrow two lane road constructed
of chip-seal and open ditches for drainage. There are no sidewalks in the area.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property abutting the proposed site were notified of the Public Hearing.
There is not an active neighborhood association located in this area.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Provide a proper private access easement.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary, no comment. For lots less than three
acres provide the means of wastewater disposal on the site plan and provide a
preliminary approval from the Pulaski County Sanitarian.
Entergy: No comment.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: A 15-foot easement along all property lines is required. Contact SBC at 373-
5112 (Charles McDonald) for additional details.
Central Arkansas Water: Water service is not available from Central Arkansas
Water. The Maumelle Water Corp serves this area. Contact Maumelle Water
Corporation and provide documentation the lots can be served.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted. Contact the Volunteer Fire Department in
the area to determine if the area can be served with fire protection.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1392
3
County Planning:
1. Provide the source of title.
2. Provide the names of adjoining subdivision.
3. Provide the owners of adjoining unsubdivided lands.
4. Provide a summary of the development plan.
5. Provide any existing restrictions (original bill of assurance).
6. Provide a drainage plan.
7. Provide County Certification of Approval on the proposed preliminary plat.
8. Provide a draft Bill of Assurance.
9. Provide proof of legal access to lots and across lots to adjoining properties.
Provide easements or right of way and show on the proposed plat.
10. Provide certification or approval by the fire district to serve the development.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the original
submission was the creation of three lots. Staff stated the current request was
the creation of two lots both containing over three acres. Staff stated according
to the Health Department anything over three acres is not considered a
subdivision under their regulations.
Staff noted comments for County Planning stating the applicant should contact
the County with regard to the comment concerning access. Staff stated
according to information furnished by the County the road was not located in the
described access easement.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the
concerns raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated the source of title of the landowner along with the names
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1392
4
of owners of property in excess of two and one-half acres. The applicant has
also indicated the eastern-most lot will be accessed from a private access
easement in place from an adjoining property owner.
The proposed subdivision lies outside the city limits and sewer is not available to
this site. The Arkansas Department of Health has indicated according to their
rules and regulations, areas divided in parcels in excess of three acres are not
considered a subdivision. The proposed lots are 4.92 acres and 3.86 acres;
therefore staff feels the area will perk with a septic system.
The County has indicated the private street, Old Arkansas Drive, is not located in
the easement. Staff has some concern with the roadway but feels since the road
was been in place for more than seven years there is a prescriptive easement.
The applicant has indicated they will work with the County to resolve this issue.
The requested plat required a waiver from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the
creation of lots without public street frontage. The Subdivision Ordinance
requires all lots developed to have access to a public street (Section 31-231)
except where private streets are explicitly approved by the Planning Commission.
Since this development was originally platted in tracts in excess of five acres the
Little Rock Planning Commission did not review the proposed development.
Tract G-1R will have access to a private street, Old Arkansas Drive, which allows
access to this tract. Tract G-2R is provided access from an existing 20-foot road
easement through Tract H located to the north. Staff feels this development is
acceptable. The lot has been accessed in this manner since construction and
there appears to not be any conflicts.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the proposed subdivision of this single tract into
two tracts should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the applicant provide a proper access easement to the
proposed subdivision.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff stated they felt the proposed subdivision of this
single tract into two tracts should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding
area. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1392
5
Staff presented a recommendation the applicant provide a proper access easement to
the proposed subdivision.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance from the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: S-1393
NAME: Otter Creek Plaza Preliminary Plat
lLOCATION: On the northeast corner of Otter Creek Parkway and Stagecoach Road
DEVELOPER:
Paul Stagg
5016 Calice Creek Cove
North Little Rock, AR 72216
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 7.2 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial and R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 7.2 acre tract into five non-residential
lots. The applicant has filed a rezoning request for Lot 5 to be heard at the
August 7, 2003 Planning Commission Public Hearing.
The plat consists of five lots ranging in size from 0.87 acres to 2.15 acres.
Shared driveways and access will be used to limit the number of curb-cuts onto
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1393
2
the two arterials. Stagecoach Road is currently constructed to Master Street
Plan standard with necessary right-of-way in place. Otter Creek Road will be
widened to one-half of a 59 foot street with sidewalks. The applicant is proposing
a phasing plan for the final platting of the lots. The lots will be final platted as
development for the lot becomes imminent. The sidewalks will also be phased
with the final platting and be constructed when the adjacent lot develops.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant site with access to Otter Creek Road and Stagecoach Road.
The area is predominately non-residential uses including a large shopping center
containing a grocery store and several neighborhood commercial type uses and
a drive-in restaurant located on an out parcel. There is a large, vacant C-2
zoned site located to the southwest of the site adjacent to the drive-in restaurant.
The area to the south, across Otter Creek Road is zoned C-3 and being used as
an office use.
Stagecoach Road is a five lane road narrowing to two lanes at the intersection of
Otter Creek Road and Stagecoach Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an
adjoining property owner. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the
proposed site along with the Otter Creek Homeowners Association and
Southwest United for Progress were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Otter Creek Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial.
A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. No right
turn lane required.
2. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding streetlight requirements.
3. Driveways shall conform to Section 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. No
driveway allowed between Lots 1 and 2. Move driveway between Lots 4 and
5 to 265 feet from next driveway.
4. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
5. Re-plot the floodplain line per current FIRM map.
6. Set finished floor elevations.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required
for Lots 2 and 3. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1393
3
details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this
site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire facilities will be
required. If additional water facilities are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will
apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire
system. An existing waterline easement recorded as document 95-27136 should be
shown on the plat. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met. This development will have minor impact on
existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438
for additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request
was for a five lot plat most of which was located on C-3 zoned property. Staff
noted one of the proposed lots was currently zoned R-2 and the applicant had
filed a request to rezone the lot which would be heard by the Commission at their
August 7, 2003 Public Hearing.
Staff requested Mr. White provide the zoning classification of the proposed plat
on each lot. Staff also requested Mr. White locate the floodway to determine that
none of the proposed lots were affected by the floodway. Mr. White stated the
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1393
4
floodplain was located at 294 feet and a three foot fill would be required on a
small portion of proposed Lot 5.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the shared driveway for
proposed Lots 1 and 2 was too close to the intersection to meet the minimum
ordinance requirement. Staff stated the driveway should be located 300 feet
from the intersection and requested the drive be relocated to the north. Staff also
stated the required driveway for Lots 3 and 4 should be relocated to allow 265
feet from the driveway proposed for Lot 5. Mr. White stated the driveway for Lot
5 would be relocated to the east to allow the minimum separation.
Staff noted comments from the other departments and agencies suggesting Mr.
White contact the various representatives for further clarification. There being no
further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff on July 7, 2003 addressing the
issues raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has relocated the driveway for proposed Lot 5 to the east allowing proposed Lot
5 single access. The remainder of the development is proposing shared
driveway locations. Staff is supportive of the driveways as proposed.
The applicant is proposing a minimum lot size of 0.87 acres or 37,892 square
feet. This is more than adequate to meet the minimum lot size required by the C-
3, General Commercial District (14,000 square feet).
The applicant has indicated right-of-way dedications will be made along the
roadways where required. The applicant has also indicated street improvements
will be constructed to Otter Creek Road. The applicant is requesting the
sidewalk placement be installed with each lot as they develop. Staff is not
supportive of the placement of sidewalks in this configuration. Staff feels the
sidewalks should be put in place upon the initial development to ensure the
sidewalks are placed within the subdivision.
Although there are no major outstanding issues associated with the proposed
request staff feels the approval should be held to coincide with the rezoning
request. If the zoning for proposed Lot 5 is not secured, then staff would not
support the platting of this area as a lot. Staff recommends the item be deferred
to the August 7, 2003, Public Hearing to allow the request to be heard with the
rezoning request for proposed Lot 5.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the item be deferred to the August 7, 2003 Public Hearing to
allow the request to be heard with the rezoning request for the area which is
included in proposed Lot 5.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1393
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff recommended the item be deferred to the
August 7, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral would allow the item to be
heard with the rezoning request for a portion of the area included in proposed Lot 5.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent
agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: S-1394
NAME: Carter Oaks Addition Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: West side of Carter Lane ½ mile south of Taylor Loop Road
DEVELOPER:
Carter Oaks, LLC
c/o White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 5.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 20 FT. NEW STREET: 1360 L.F.
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 5.0-acre tract into 20 single-family
residential lots. A new public street extending from Carter Lane is proposed to
access the new lots with three of the lots fronting onto a proposed collector street
(Lamarche Drive). The average lot size proposed is 60-feet by 120-feet or 7,200
square feet.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394
2
The applicant is proposing the construction of a new residential street (45-feet of
right-of-way and 24-feet of pavement) with lots loading from the new street,
Carter Oaks Lane. The applicant is also proposing ½ street construction to
Lamarche Drive, a proposed collector street, which adjoins the applicant’s
western property line.
The applicant is proposing the development to be constructed in two phases.
Lots 5 – 17 will be completed in Phase I with Lots 1 – 4 and 18 – 20 being
completed in Phase II.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family structure along with a small pond
behind the structure. The site is a wooded site slightly sloping to the east.
Carter Lane is a narrow road with open ditches and no sidewalks. The area
around the site has developed with large homes on large lots and is
predominately single-family. The area to the west is a non-conforming use
(Westrock lawn mower service).
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. All owners of property abutting the proposed site along with the
Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. La Marche Drive is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial
street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
2. Provide design of street conforming to “MSP” (Master Street Plan). Construct
one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with
planned development. The owner of opposite development is required to
participate. Coordinate with owner and with City, including profile grade
design.
3. “Streetlights”. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding street light requirements.
4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
5. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required.
6. Grading permit will be required on this development. Identify and replace
problem soils in the pond area.
7. Ditch shall be designed for capacity indicated. Ditch shall be sodded and
velocity controlled per the stormdrain manual.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394
3
8. Easements shown for proposed stormdrainage are required, per the
stormdrain manual.
9. Utility excavation within proposed rights-of-way shall be per Article V of
Section 30.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required
for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional
details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: A 10-foot easement along all property lines is required. Contact SBC at 373-
5112 (Charles McDonald) for additional details.
Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required in order to
provide service to this property. An oversize line (16-inch) may be required in
LaMarche Drive to comply with the Central Arkansas Water master plan. In that case
Central Arkansas Water would participate in the estimated cost of facilities that are
in excess to those required for service to this development. A Capital Investment
Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in
addition to normal charges. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. This development will have minor
impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to
provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at
992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394
4
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the request
was for a preliminary plat located off Carter Lane. Staff stated the applicant
intended to subdivide 5.0 acres into 20 single-family residential lots. Staff noted
the proposed lots sizes met the minimum requirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
Staff requested Mr. White provide the source of title of the owner on the
proposed plat and to indicate owners of platted tracts in excess of 2 ½ acres.
Public Works comments were addressed. There was a discussion concerning
the need for a collector street in this area. It was generally determined a
collector street was not needed since Carter Lane ended just south of the
property and would not be extended any further south.
There was a discussion concerning the acceptable width of one-half street
improvements to Lamarche Drive. It was determined the developer would build
to a minimum of 20-feet of asphalt if the remainder of Lamarche Drive was not
constructed at the time of final platting of Phase II of the proposed development.
Staff noted comments from the various other agencies and departments. Staff
suggested Mr. White contact them with specific questions concerning their
comments.
There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the issues
raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated the source of title for the owner and the names of owners of unplatted
tracts in excess of two and one-half acres on the proposed preliminary plat.
The applicant has indicated the minimum lot size to be 60 feet by 120 or 7200
square feet. The applicant has also indicated the lots will be served by Central
Arkansas Water and the subdivision will connect to the Little Rock Wastewater
utility for sewer service. The applicant has indicated no portion of the
development is located within the 100 year floodplain. The proposed lots sizes
meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant is proposing the development in two phases. Lots 5 – 17 will be
developed in Phase I with Lots 1 – 4 and 18 – 20 being developed in Phase II.
Staff is supportive of the phasing plan presented.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394
5
The applicant is proposing a single street through the subdivision accessing
Carter Lane and LaMarche Drive. LaMarche Drive is a proposed collector street
along the western boundary of the subdivision. The applicant has proposed one
lot will be accessed from LaMarche Drive. The applicant has indicated
dedication of right-of-way per Master Street Plan standard and the construction
of a four foot sidewalk along with twenty foot of pavement when Phase II is
developed. Staff is supportive of this development. The adjoining property,
Valley Falls Estates, will construct the remaining portion of LaMarche Drive when
development of the adjoining lots begins.
Originally staff had requested Carter Lane be designated as a Collector Street.
Staff has reviewed the area and has determined Carter Lane is not needed as a
collector street. Carter Lane will not be extended to the south any further than it
currently exists. The development potential along Carter Lane does not warrant
a Collector Street and Deltic Timber Corporation owns the property located to the
south of where Carter Lane currently ends. There is an approved preliminary
plat for the area, which does not connect to Carter Lane.
The applicant has proposed drainage within the proposed plat area. There is
currently an existing drainage ditch the applicant intends maintain as open
drainage. The applicant will install the drainage per the city’s storm drainage
manual.
There are concerns from area residents concerning the proposed development
and the minimum lot sizes proposed. The Bill of Assurance for this area was
never recorded and therefore does not exist. The proposed development has
met the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance for proposed lot
sizes, lot widths, required dedication of right-of-way and street improvements.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the applicant has meet the minimum requirements
of the Subdivision Ordinance.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
approval. Staff stated the proposed preliminary plat was not requesting any waivers or
variances from the Subdivision Ordinance.
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, reminded the Commission of Richardson vs. the
City of Little Rock stating that if a proposed preliminary plat met all the standards set forth
in the Subdivision Ordinance the Commission did not have any discretion concerning the
approval.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394
6
Mr. Edward and Ms. Cathy Girard spoke in opposition of the proposed development.
Mr. Girard stated he and his wife owned the property located to the south of the proposed
subdivision and questioned the measures that had been taken in consideration concerning
drainage.
Mr. Girard stated there was a dry creek located in the area and the proposed site plan did
not include the creek area. He stated without consideration of drainage the proposed
subdivision would cause water problems for him and his neighbors.
Ms. Girard spoke in opposition of the proposed development stating the density was to
great for the area. She stated she and her husband had also subdivided their property into
four residential lots. She stated this would be more in keeping with the surrounding area
and not the placement of twenty homes on five acres.
Mr. Kirk Tompkins spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated there were
several consequences to neighboring property owners that had not been studied by the
proposed developer. Mr. Tompkins questioned legal access to the proposed Carter Oaks
development. He stated Carter Lane was a narrow two lane road constructed of chip seal
material. He stated the road was a non-marked roadway barely wide enough for two cars
to pass.
Mr. Tompkins stated the neighborhood had grave concerns with the roadbed and adjacent
drainage ditch. He stated he was concerned with the additional traffic and the impact the
additional traffic would have on the road.
Mr. Tompkins stated more than 250 acres of hillside supply the water that feeds the
reservoir on his family’s property. He stated for 50 years the drainage had supplied a safe
environment for the fish and wild life reservoir on the family’s property. He stated the water
source flowed through the Carter Oaks development. He questioned what guarantee the
area had that the water supply would not be interrupted, contaminated or polluted.
Mr. Tompkins also questioned the availability of water, sewer and electric power for the
area and the effect the addition of 20 homes would have on the existing supplies.
Mr. Tompkins also questioned what studies have been performed concerning fire safety
and the availability of service to the area.
Public Works staff stated the road was a chip seal narrow road with open ditches. Staff
stated the road was eighteen to twenty feet of pavement as stated by Mr. Tompkins. Staff
stated there were approximately 15 to 20 homes on Carter Lane and the addition of 20
homes was not that much different than currently existed.
Commissioner Faust stated the City must comply with its own ordinances. She stated the
Commission should visit the ordinances and build in the ordinance some latitude the
Commission could use for discretion in considering plats.
A motion was made to approve the proposed preliminary plat as filed. The motion carried
by a vote of 10 ayes, 1 no and 0 absent.
July 24, 2003
ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-1716-E
NAME: Pleasant Ridge North Office Building Short-form POD Time Extension
LOCATION: 11400 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
Shickel Development Company
11601 Pleasant Ridge Road
Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72222
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.83 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: POD
ALLOWED USES: Office
PROPOSED ZONING: POD – Time Extension
PROPOSED USE: Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1716-E
2
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 18,303 July 5, 2000 establishing a
Planned Office Development titled Pleasant Ridge North Office Building Short-form
POD. The site was zoned O-2 and the request was to rezone the site to POD to allow
the development of an office building.
The applicant proposed to construct a 34,551 square foot office building (3 stories) and
117 parking spaces on the site. The proposed use mix for the building included a bank
and general/professional offices. A drive-thru bank facility was proposed at the east
end of the building. The proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm.
One (1) ground mounted sign was proposed on the west side of the Cantrell Road
entrance. The applicant noted that this sign would conform to the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District standard (monument-type, maximum height – 6 feet, maximum area –
72 square feet).
Two (2) access points were proposed to serve the property (one near the southeast
corner of the property and one at the northwest corner). Public Works indicated support
of the proposed driveway locations. A 20-foot wide utility and drainage easement,
which runs diagonally through the center of the property was proposed to be relocated
to the property’s perimeter.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Per LRC 36-454(e), (Ordinance No. 18,863 adopted May 6, 2003 Section 3.) the
applicant is to file a final development plan within three (3) years of the date of
the passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary plan. As per the same
Section, the applicant may request from the Planning Commission an extension
of not more than two (2) years. The applicant has submitted a request for a two-
year time extension of the POD zoning. The applicant has stated the office
development has been slowed somewhat due to economic reasons. The
applicant has stated the additional two-year time extension will insure the time
necessary to begin construction.
B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested two (2) year time extension. All
previous conditions, comments and recommendations will continue to be in effect
for the POD.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the
requested two (2) year time extension. Staff stated all previous conditions, comments
and recommendations would continue to be in effect for the POD.
July 24, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1716-E
3
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.